SZIMY v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 249

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZIMY v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 249 SZIMY v MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 2046 OF 2006

CONTI J

26 FEBRUARY 2007

SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2046 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZIMY

Appellant

AND: MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: CONTI J DATE OF ORDER: 26 FEBRUARY 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The name of the first respondent be amended to 'Minister for Immigration and Citizenship'. 2. The Refugee Review Tribunal be joined as the second respondent. 3. The appeal be dismissed. 4. The appellant pay the first respondent's costs fixed at $2,000. 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 2046 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZIMY

Appellant

AND: MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: CONTI J

DATE: 26 FEBRUARY 2007

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal from the judgment of Federal Magistrate Driver given on 3 October 2006. His Honour dismissed an application for an order to show cause filed in the Federal Magistrates Court on 15 March 2006, involving proceedings whereby the appellant sought review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') handed down on 21 February 2006. The Tribunal decision affirmed the earlier decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs made on 18 October 2005 to refuse the appellant a protection visa. 2 The appellant is a citizen of the People's Republic of China and claims to be a Falun Gong practitioner. She complained as to having been monitored, questioned, threatened, and detained by government officials. She testified that her mother was a Falun Dafa practitioner who had been detained in the past in China by government officials, and that she feared she would be detained and imprisoned if subsequently returned to China. 3 The appellant's claims were originally set out in her protection visa application. She also provided a short statement of her claims to the Tribunal and clarified her claims at the Tribunal hearing.