Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZCVD v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1996
SZCVD v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1990 OF 2007
MOORE J
13 DECEMBER 2007
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1990 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZCVD
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J DATE OF ORDER: 13 DECEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the Minister's costs fixed in the sum of $850. 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 1990 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZCVD
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE: 13 DECEMBER 2007
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is what should be treated as an application for leave to appeal from the judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 18 December 2007, dismissing, inter alia, as an abuse of process an application for judicial review of a decision of the Tribunal (SZCVD v Minister for Immigration [2007] FMCA 1651). The Tribunal had determined that it had no jurisdiction to entertain an application for review of a decision of the delegate of the Minister. That decision of the Tribunal was made against the background where the Tribunal had earlier dealt with a challenge to the decision of the delegate to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. 2 That decision in turn had been the subject of challenges both in this Court (SZCVD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1456), the Federal Magistrates Court (SZCVD v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 665) and the High Court (SZCVD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2007] HCATrans 355). 3 The applicant has not appeared this morning. The applicant wrote to the Court, by a letter forwarded by facsimile on 12 December 2007. In that letter the applicant indicated that he had the flu and would not be able to attend today's hearing. The applicant was informed by phone that if he did not attend the matter might be dealt with in his absence. In my opinion the letter provides an insufficient foundation to adjourn the matter. The Federal Magistrate did not err in reaching the conclusion that the application for judicial review, filed in the Federal Magistrates Court, on 24 August 2007, was an abuse of process. 4 I order that the application for leave to appeal be dismissed and order that the applicant pay the Minister's costs. I fix those costs in the sum of $850. I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.
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