SZEZJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 946

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZEZJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 946

MIGRATION – application for enlargement of time to file and serve notice of appeal – no issue of principle – application dismissed SZEZJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS NSD 961 OF 2005 CONTI J 7 JULY 2005 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 961 OF 2005

BETWEEN: SZEZJ

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: CONTI J

DATE OF ORDER: 7 JULY 2005

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for an enlargement of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal is dismissed. 2. The applicant must pay the respondent's costs assessed at $500. 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 961 OF 2005

BETWEEN: SZEZJ

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: CONTI J

DATE: 7 JULY 2005

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for an enlargement of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal from the reasons for judgment of a Federal Magistrate delivered on 20 May 2005 (SZEZJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FMCA 745), which dismissed the applicant's application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') handed down on 30 June 2004. The Tribunal affirmed the Minister's delegate's decision to deny the applicant a protection (Class XA) visa on 20 May 2003. The applicant filed his application for an enlargement of time and two affidavits in support on 15 June 2005, which was outside of the 21 day time period mandated by O 52 r 15(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules and now seeks the Court's leave pursuant to O 52 r 15(2) to file and serve his notice of appeal, a draft copy of which is annexed to his application. 2 The first affidavit sworn by the applicant states that he is a citizen of Bangladesh who formerly lived in Dhaka prior to coming to Australia on 29 March 2003. The applicant attests that whilst in Dhaka, he 'was deeply involved with the politics' and 'in my political activities by taking politics ACTIVITIES; meetings, demonstration' (read literally). The applicant appears to summarise the basis of his claim that he has a well-founded fear of persecution on his return to Bangladesh in [4] of that affidavit, which reads literally as follows: 'After the general election BNP took power illegally. They arrested our leaders, AND the leader of the AL. Published a list of people who were previously holding super of Bangladesh for arrest/kill. Arresting our member of the party by using Black law-Special Power Act. My lifer was in danger. The BNP worker listed me and tried to kill me several occasions. By finding no other ways I left Bangladesh to save my life.' It is not clear from that description what party or group the applicant claims he belonged to or was associated with however as is apparent from the thorough treatment of the Tribunal's decision contained in the Federal Magistrate's reasons for judgment, the applicant claims to have an association with a political party called the Awami League. 3 In paragraph [6] of the same affidavit, the applicant submits that he is 'not satisfied with the [Federal Magistrate] decision of my Judicial review application. I argued my application but honourable court did not consider that'. Paragraph [7] provides the following explanation for why his appeal to this Court was brought out of time: 'my application is late because I do not understand properly the decision of [Federal Magistrate]. After receive the copy of judgement then I appeal.' This same explanation is repeated in the second affidavit sworn by the applicant and makes up its entire contents. 4 The draft notice of appeal filed on 15 June 2005 contains the following purported grounds (read literally): '2. The Single judge of the Federal Magistrates Court in his Honors Judgment delivered on the 20 May 2005 failed to find error of law, Jurisdictional error Procedural fairness and relief Under Section 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903.