SZKCI v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 1291

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZKCI v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 1291

SZKCI AND SZKCJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 954 OF 2007

MIDDLETON J

8 AUGUST 2007

SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 954 OF 2007

BETWEEN: SZKCI

First Appellant

SZKCJ

Second Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MIDDLETON J DATE OF ORDER: 8 AUGUST 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellants pay the costs of the first respondent. 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 954 OF 2007

BETWEEN: SZKCI

First Appellant

SZKCJ

Second Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MIDDLETON J

DATE: 8 AUGUST 2007

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal against a judgment of a federal magistrate of 17 May 2007 dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') dated 4 December 2006. 2 The appellants, who are husband and wife and citizens of India, arrived in Australia on 25 February 2006. The appellants applied for a protection visa which was refused on 30 June 2006 by a delegate of the first respondent. Only the appellant husband (to who I will refer as 'the appellant') made claims under the Convention with the appellant's wife relying on membership of the appellant's family unit. 3 The appellant's infant son had also been included on the application for a protection visa. However, in June 2006, the appellant withdrew his son from the application as he had been sent back to India with a family friend as he missed his grandmother.