Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZHAH v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1012
SZHAH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL No NSD 581 of 2006
FINN J
2 AUGUST 2006
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 581 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZHAH
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: FINN J DATE OF ORDER: 2 AUGUST 2006
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. 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 581 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZHAH
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: FINN J
DATE: 2 AUGUST 2006
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal from a decision of a Federal Magistrate rejecting an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") refusing to grant a protection visa to the applicant. The grounds of appeal to this court are a condensed version of the grounds of the application to the Federal Magistrate, the errors ascribed to the Federal Magistrate being in substance the same errors as were alleged against the Tribunal. 2 The appellant is a Pakistani citizen who came to Australia on 2 March 2004. His claims have twice been to the Tribunal, the first of these being the subject of a successful appeal to the Federal Magistrates Court. 3 The grounds of appeal against the Federal Magistrate's decision are three-fold: first, that his Honour erred in finding that the Tribunal did not take account of relevant considerations which are then particularised; second, his Honour erred in finding that the Tribunal did not carry out its statutory duty, the essence of this complaint being that the Tribunal failed to discharge its duty bona fide, a grave and unsubstantiated allegation as I will later indicate; and, third, his Honour erred in finding that the Tribunal's decision was not irrational, illogical and based on an unwarranted assumption.
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