Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZFDN v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 768
SZFDN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION &
MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS NSD 681 of 2005 LINDGREN J 7 JUNE 2005 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 681 OF 2005
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT
BETWEEN: SZFDN
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND
MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: LINDGREN J
DATE OF ORDER: 7 JUNE 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 681 OF 2005
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT
BETWEEN: SZFDN
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND
MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: LINDGREN J
DATE: 7 JUNE 2005
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 25 May 2005, I ordered, to the extent that it might be necessary, that the appellant have leave to file and serve a notice of appeal in accordance with the form of notice of appeal annexed to his affidavit sworn 25 April 2005 in support of his application for an extension of time ([2005] FCA 725). 2 The appellant appeals from a decision of the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia ('FMCA') given on 23 February 2005. By that decision the FMCA dismissed his application for a review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. The Tribunal's decision was handed down on 31 July 2003 and affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister ('Delegate' and 'Minister' respectively) not to grant a protection visa. 3 The grounds of appeal stated in the notice of appeal are as follows: '(a) the Tribunal failed to consider and properly exercise its discretionary power provided under s427(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958; (b) the judge failed to consider the Tribunal's decision, no basis for making such a statement. The Tribunal accepted the types of penalty constitutes persecution according to the principles laid down in the judgment of McHugh J P57. The observation is made nor is it necessary element of persecution that individuals should be the victim of a series of acts. A single act of oppression may suffice.'
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