Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZDZV v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 416 SZDZV v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS NSD 1386 OF 2004 STONE J 15 APRIL 2005 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1386 OF 2004
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZDZV
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: STONE J
DATE OF ORDER: 15 APRIL 2005
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1386 OF 2004
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZDZV
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: STONE J
DATE: 15 APRIL 2005
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction 1 On 24 September 2004 the appellant filed a notice of appeal in respect of a decision of a Federal Magistrate made on 7 September 2004. His Honour dismissed the appellant's application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('Tribunal') given on 29 April 1998. The Federal Magistrate found that there was no evidence of jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's reasons for decision. His Honour therefore held that the Tribunal's decision was a privative clause decision and upheld the respondent's objection to competency based on the appellant's failure to file an application for review within the 28 days allowed by s 477(1A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ('Migration Act'). In doing so his Honour commented that the application was made some years outside that time limit. The Minister now concedes that the objection to competency filed in the Federal Magistrates Court was filed in error and no longer presses the objection to competency filed in this Court in respect of the current proceeding.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate