Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZGZM v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 701 SZGZM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 408 OF 2007
EDMONDS J
14 MAY 2007
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 408 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZGZM
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: EDMONDS J DATE OF ORDER: 14 MAY 2007
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant 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 408 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZGZM
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: EDMONDS J
DATE: 14 MAY 2007
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction 1 This is an appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court (Cameron FM) dismissing an application for review of a decision of the second respondent ('the Tribunal') affirming a decision of a delegate of the first respondent ('the Minister') refusing an application for a protection (class XA) visa.
Background 2 The appellant, a citizen of Pakistan, arrived in Australia on 25 October 2004 and applied for a protection (class XA) visa on 30 November 2004. On 9 March 2005 a delegate of the Minister refused the application. On 5 April 2005 the appellant applied to the Tribunal for a review of the delegate's decision. 3 The Tribunal, as first constituted, affirmed the delegate's decision. On 30 March 2006 that decision was set aside by Federal Magistrate Emmett and the matter remitted to the Tribunal. 4 The Tribunal, as subsequently constituted, invited the appellant to attend a hearing on 8 September 2006. The appellant attended the hearing on that day. By letter dated 8 September 2006, the Tribunal wrote to the appellant inviting him to comment on information that the Tribunal considered would be the reason, or a part of the reason, for affirming the decision of the delegate. The appellant did not respond to that letter.
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