Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZEGE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1316
SZEGE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1286 OF 2006
MOORE J
5 OCTOBER 2006
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1286 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZEGE
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 is dismissed. 3. The Refugee Review Tribunal be added as a respondent. 4. 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 1286 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZEGE
Appellant
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 By judgment of 21 June 2006 a Federal Magistrate dismissed an application filed on 22 November 2005: see SZEGE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2006] FMCA 946. In that application the applicant sought judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. A decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal affirming the delegate's decision has previously been the subject of proceedings before the Federal Magistrates Court, this Court and the High Court: see SZEGE v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 527, SZEGE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 783, SZEGE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCATrans 911. 2 In his reasons for judgment, the Federal Magistrate addressed the issues raised by the applicant in his application and his submissions and found the application was an abuse of process. Finding that he had no jurisdiction to hear an application for review of a delegate's decision that had already been reviewed by the Refugee Review Tribunal, he dismissed the application. It is not apparent to me that His Honour erred in reaching that conclusion. 3 While the proceedings in this court purport to be an appeal, the decision against which the appeal is brought is one in respect of which leave to appeal is required. It appears to me the appeal is doomed to fail as the Federal Magistrate was correct in concluding that the application was an abuse of process. Accordingly, I refuse leave to appeal with 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