FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1312 NALK v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1177 OF 2006 MOORE J 5 OCTOBER 2006 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1177 OF 2006 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: NALK Applicant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent JUDGE: MOORE J DATE OF ORDER: 5 OCTOBER 2006 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The purported appeal be dismissed. 3. The Refugee Review Tribunal be added as a respondent. 4. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1,000.00. 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 1177 OF 2006 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: NALK Applicant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent JUDGE: MOORE J DATE: 5 OCTOBER 2006 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is what purports to be an appeal against a judgment of the Federal Magistrate of 30 May 2006: see NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FMCA 820, dismissing as incompetent an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made in January 2003. That application was dismissed as incompetent against a background where the applicant had twice litigated in the Federal Magistrates Court: see NALK v Minister for Immigration [2003] FMCA 388 and NALK v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2005] FMCA 1238; twice litigated in the Federal Court see: NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 82 and NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1463; and twice litigated in the High Court: see NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCATrans 270 and NALK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] HCATrans 192, seeking relief in relation to the Tribunal's decision to affirm a decision refusing to grant him a protection visa. 2 It is not apparent to me that the Federal Magistrate erred in dismissing the application as incompetent. It may well be that the applicant needs leave to appeal. If so, I would refuse leave. If the applicant is entitled to appeal as of right I would dismiss the appeal and I do so with costs fixed in the sum of $1,000. I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. Associate: Dated: 23 October 2006 Applicant appeared in person. Solicitor for the First Respondent: Clayton Utz Date of Hearing: 5 October 2006 Date of Judgment: 5 October 2006