Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZDFX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 973
SZDFX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS NSD 1104 OF 2006
MOORE J
4 AUGUST 2006
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1104 OF 2006
BETWEEN: SZDFX
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 4 AUGUST 2006
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the 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 1104 OF 2006
BETWEEN: SZDFX
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE: 4 AUGUST 2006
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 18 May 2006 dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ('the Minister') not to grant the applicant a protection visa. By that application the applicant also sought an "order to show cause" and an order of review under the Administrative Decisions Judicial Review Act 1977 (Cth). Federal Magistrate Barnes also had before her an interlocutory application filed by the Minister seeking that the application be dismissed because the Court had no jurisdiction to hear the application because it sought review of a primary decision within s 476(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and, in the alternative, because the application was an abuse of process. Her Honour dismissed the application as incompetent and, in the alternative, as an abuse of process pursuant to Rule 13.10(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001. 2 The applicant had previously applied to the Federal Magistrates Court, unsuccessfully, for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') handed down on 17 March 2004: SZDFX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FMCA 615. The Tribunal had affirmed a decision of the delegate not to grant the applicant a protection visa. An appeal against the judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court to this Court was dismissed on 1 August 2005: SZDFX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1172. An application for special leave to appeal from the Federal Court decision of Hill J was refused on 15 December 2005: [2005] HCATrans 1023. 3 It is not apparent to me that the Federal Magistrate erred in dealing with this matter as she did. The applicant would have no prospects in any appeal were leave granted. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal should be dismissed. 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