SZGKX v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 461

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZGKX v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 461

MIGRATION – appeal from a decision of the Federal Magistrates Court – application for a protection visa – serious personal assault – whether Tribunal failed to comply with s 430 of the Migration Act – whether Tribunal failed to take adequately into account relevant material – whether Tribunal failed adequately to take into account integer of appellant husband's claims – reviewable error established Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 430(1) Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Singh(1997) 72 FCR 288 referred to NABE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2004) 144 FCR 1 referred to WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 75 ALD 630 referred to Iyer v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 52 referred to Addo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 940 referred to Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; ex parte Durairajasingham (2000) 168 ALR 407 considered NAJT v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2005) 147 FCR 51 referred to SZGKX AND SZGKY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1015 OF 2006

CONTI J

29 MARCH 2007

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1015 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZGKX

First Appellant

SZGKY

Second Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: CONTI J DATE OF ORDER: 29 march 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The orders made by the Federal Magistrate on 5 May 2006 be set aside. 3. In lieu thereof it be ordered that the following writs issue: (a) a writ of certiorari issued to the second respondent quashing its decision made on 11 April 2005; (b) a writ of prohibition directed to the first respondent prohibiting the first respondent from acting upon or giving effect to or proceeding further upon the decision of the second respondent; and (c) a writ of mandamus to compel the second respondent, differently constituted, to reconsider the application made on 21 September 2004 according to law.