FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA SZAZP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 829 SZAZP V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 632 OF 2006 MOORE J 14 JUNE 2006 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 632 OF 2006 BETWEEN: SZAZP APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS FIRST RESPONDENT REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGE: MOORE DATE OF ORDER: 14 JUNE 2006 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1100.00. 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 632 OF 2006 BETWEEN: SZAZP APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS FIRST RESPONDENT REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGE: MOORE DATE: 14 JUNE 2006 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 7 March 2006: see SZAZP v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 329. His Honour refused to set aside an order of 1 February 2006 dismissing an application for non-appearance. The original application in the Federal Magistrates Court was filed on 23 November 2005. It sought to challenge a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 28 May 2003. That decision had already been the subject of litigation in the Federal Magistrates Court, this Court and the High Court. 2 The Federal Magistrate did not accept the applicant's explanation for non-appearance. His Honour also found that it would be futile to set aside his earlier order because the Tribunal's decision was a privative clause decision over which that Court lacked jurisdiction. 3 It is not apparent to me the Federal Magistrate erred in reaching this conclusion and, accordingly, any appeal has no prospects of success. The application for leave to appeal should be dismissed with costs. I order those costs be fixed in the sum of $1100. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. Associate: Dated: 13 July 2006 The Applicant appeared in person Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore Date of Hearing: 14 June 2006 Date of Judgment: 14 June 2006