Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZKAM v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1835
SZKAM, SZKAN AND SZKAO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1629 OF 2007
RYAN J
23 NOVEMBER 2007
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1629 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKAM
First Appellant
SZKAN
Second Appellant
SZKAO
Third Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RYAN J DATE OF ORDER: 23 NOVEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The first and second appellants pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed in default of agreement.
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 1629 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKAM
First Appellant
SZKAN
Second Appellant
SZKAO
Third Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RYAN J
DATE: 23 NOVEMBER 2007
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal from orders made by Cameron FM on 27 July 2007 dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal"); see SZKAM v The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2007] FMCA 1231. By a decision made on 7 December 2006, the Tribunal had affirmed a refusal of 17 June 2006 by a delegate of the then Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ("the Minister") to grant a protection visa to the appellants. 2 By way of background, the appellants are nationals of India and include a husband, wife and their child. Only the first appellant, the appellant husband, purported to make claims under the Convention and the appellant wife and child relied upon membership of his family unit. For those reasons, the appellant husband will henceforth be referred to as "the appellant". The appellant arrived in Australia on 8 April 2006 and, on 18 May 2006 applied for a protection visa, which was refused by a delegate of the Minister on 17 June 2006.
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