MZXCN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 893

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MZXCN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 893 MZXCN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 875 OF 2007

MOORE J

8 JUNE 2007

SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 875 OF 2007

BETWEEN: MZXCN

Applicant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MOORE J DATE OF ORDER: 8 JUNE 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $700.00. 3. No further application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal signed on 20 February 2007, reference N97/007474, or review of the decision of the delegate of the first respondent dated 21 April 1998, or for review of any other administrative decision or action by any person concerning the visa application which was considered in that decision, shall be accepted for filing without prior leave of the Court. 4. Any proceeding instituted by the applicant relating to the above may not be continued without the leave of the Court.

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 875 OF 2007

BETWEEN: MZXCN

Applicant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MOORE J

DATE: 8 JUNE 2007

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for leave to appeal to appeal against the judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 2 May 2007 dismissing on several alternative bases an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 20 February 2007: see MZCXN v Minister for Immigration [2007] FMCA 573. In that decision, the Tribunal determined it had no power to deal with the application for review given that the primary decision had already been the subject of review by the Tribunal on an earlier occasion. 2 The Federal Magistrate accepted that this conclusion was correct. The Federal Magistrate was correct in reaching that conclusion. It also appears to me that the Federal Magistrate was correct in reaching various other conclusions concerning alternative bases for dismissing the application. It was an application made against the background of the applicant having litigated both in this Court and the Federal Magistrates Court and the High Court on a number of occasions the basic question of whether he should be granted a protection visa or perhaps more precisely whether there was any legal error attending the refusal to granting such a visa: see SZAUU v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 663; SZAUU v Minister for Immigration [2005] FCA 85; SZAUU v Minister for Immigration [2005] HCATrans 482; MZCXN v Minister for Immigration [2005] FCA 1889; MZCXN v Minister for Immigration [2006] HCATrans 686. 3 I dismiss the application for leave to appeal. I order that the applicant pay the Minister's costs of the application and lastly I make an order in the same terms as the order made by the Federal Magistrate concerning the filing of further process in this Court that order being adjusted to reflect the fact that it is an order of this Court. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.