SZEIK v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1199

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZEIK v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1199

SZEIK v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL &

INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

NSD 940 of 2005

LINDGREN J

23 AUGUST 2005

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 940 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZEIK

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: LINDGREN

DATE OF ORDER: 23 AUGUST 2005

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Refugee Review Tribunal be joined as second respondent to the appeal.

2. The appeal be dismissed.

3. The appellant pay the first 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 940 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZEIK

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: LINDGREN

DATE: 23 AUGUST 2005

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

introduction 1 The appellant appeals from a decision of the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia ('FMCA') delivered on 23 May 2005 (SZEIK v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 777). The FMCA dismissedan application by the appellant for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') dated 23 December 1996. By that decision the Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister (respectively, 'the Delegate' and 'the Minister') not to grant a protection visa to the appellant. 2 The appellant, a national of Lebanon, arrived in Australia in August 1993. He applied to the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs ('the Department') on 12 November 1993 for refugee status and a domestic protection temporary entry permit. The application for that permit later also had effect as an application for a Protection (Permanent) Entry Permit. 3 In its reasons for decision the Tribunal explained that on 1 September 1994 the 'protection visa' was introduced for people in Australia seeking protection as refugees (s 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ('the Act')). From that time decision makers were required to deal with refugee-related applications as if they were applications for a protection visa: s 39 of the Migration Reform Act 1992. 4 The Delegate decided on 31 March 1995 that the appellant was not a person to whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugees Convention and therefore refused the grant of a protection visa to him.