Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZAXY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 959
SZAXY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1076 OF 2006
MOORE J
27 JULY 2006
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1076 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZAXY
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 27 JULY 2006
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs. 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 1076 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZAXY
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE: 27 JULY 2006
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 30 January 2006 summarily dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 19 May 2003: see SZAXY v Minister for Immigration [2006] FMCA 104. His Honour found that the proceedings were barred by the principles of res judicata or Anshun estoppel, or alternatively, were an abuse of the Court's process. Those conclusions were reached against a background where the applicant had brought three previous proceedings, all of which were unsuccessful, in relation to the same Tribunal decision, first in the Federal Magistrates Court, then this Court and ultimately in the High Court: see SZAXY v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 743, SZAXY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 76, SZAXY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCATrans 410. 2 The applicant was notified by letter dated 7 July that the matter was listed for hearing this afternoon. The matter has been called. There has been no appearance on behalf of the applicant. 3 On the application of the Minister I dismiss the application with costs for want of prosecution. I order that the applicant pay the first respondent's costs. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.
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