SZGNP v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1839

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZGNP v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1839 SZGNP v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1940 of 2005 BRANSON J 6 DECEMBER 2005 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1940 of 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZGNP

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: BRANSON J

DATE OF ORDER: 6 DECEMBER 2005

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be dismissed.

2. The appellant pay the respondents' costs.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1940 of 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZGNP

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: BRANSON J

DATE: 6 DECEMBER 2005

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction 1 The appellant appeals from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court delivered on 4 October 2005. By that judgment a Federal Magistrate dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the second respondent ('the Tribunal') affirming a decision of a delegate of the first respondent ('the Minister') to refuse the appellant a protection visa.

Background 2 The appellant is a national of China who claims to have left China illegally in 1998 on a false passport. He entered Australia on 27 July 1998 using the same false passport and a visa which had been issued to the person bearing the name on the passport. The visa expired on 30 July 1998. The appellant has remained in Australia since that time. 3 In February 2005 the appellant was detained by Departmental officers and taken to Villawood detention centre. On 11 March 2005 the appellant lodged an application for a protection visa. He was assisted by a Legal Aid solicitor. The appellant claimed to fear persecution in China as a result of his political opinion and practice of Falun Gong. 4 A delegate of the Minister refused the appellant's application for a protection visa on 22 March 2005 and the appellant applied for review of that decision to the Tribunal on 29 March 2005. A Legal Aid solicitor again assisted the appellant in respect of the Tribunal hearing. On 27 May 2005 the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision. The decision of the Tribunal was based on the Tribunal's finding that the appellant's evidence was 'inconsistent, contradictory and implausible'.