Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZIJY v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2008] FCA 138
SZIJY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL No NSD 2171 of 2007
FINN J
22 FEBRUARY 2008
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2171 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZIJY
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: FINN J
DATE OF ORDER: 22 FEBRUARY 2008
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal fixed in the amount of $2,190.00. 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 2171 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZIJY
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: FINN J
DATE: 22 FEBRUARY 2008
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The appellant, a Chinese national, was an unsuccessful applicant for a protection visa. The reason for her lack of success in that application was that she was found not to be a truthful witness. 2 When she made her visa application the statutory declaration in English which accompanied it asserted a fear of persecution resulting from her being a known sympathiser of the peoples of Taiwan. The Minister's delegate rejected the claims made on that account and the appellant then lodged an application for review to the Tribunal. In her review application she disclaimed her original statutory declaration asserting that she did not know the contents of it and in its stead she advanced a new statutory declaration asserting a fear of persecution by the Chinese authorities founded on quite different grounds. 3 The appellant now asserts that, having been made redundant by a bicycle factory at which she worked, she led protests against the failure of the factory to pay her her allowances. The persecution she allegedly suffered arose out of her arrest after she took part in protests against the action of the tyre factory and after her denunciation for spreading anti-government ideologies and destroying the Communist Party's reputation. As is apparent from the Tribunal's reasons, it only assessed her claims by reference to those made to it, but it did use information in the original application unrelated to her claims in it, as also information in a visa application she made for business entry into Australia, in making its assessment of the appellant's credibility. 4 The appellant was closely questioned by the Tribunal at the hearing and inconsistencies in her evidence were systematically exposed. After the hearing, a s 424A letter was written to her – it was described as an "exemplary" letter by the Federal Magistrate – which set out at length the inconsistencies in her evidence. In the event, the Tribunal found her evidence to be thoroughly unconvincing and that she was not a witness of truth. It concluded: "Overall, the Tribunal does not accept that the applicant has provided a truthful account to the Tribunal as to why she left China. The Tribunal is of the view that the applicant has been prepared to provide any evidence she thinks will assist her in obtaining the visa she wants. The Tribunal does not accept that the applicant was employed at the Tianjin no 2 Bicycle Tyre Factory. The Tribunal does not accept that she was retrenched from the factory. The Tribunal does not accept that the applicant participated in any protests or that she was detained for participating in any protests. The Tribunal does not accept that the PRC authorities planned to punish her or that the PSB came to her home with a warrant after her departure. The Tribunal does not accept that the applicant is on any adverse interest to the Chinese authorities for the reasons she has claimed."
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