SZKDL v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 161

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZKDL v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 161 SZKDL AND SZKDM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 2180 OF 2007

MCKERRACHER J

26 FEBRUARY 2008

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2180 OF 2007

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZKDL

First Appellant

SZKDM

Second Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MCKERRACHER J DATE OF ORDER: 26 FEBRUARY 2008

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellants pay the costs of the first respondent fixed at $900. 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 2180 OF 2007

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZKDL

First Appellant

SZKDM

Second Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE: MCKERRACHER J

DATE: 26 FEBRUARY 2008

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal against a decision of a Federal Magistrate (Cameron FM) made on 22 October 2007 (SZKDL & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2007] FMCA 1806) dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) handed down on 23 January 2007. 2 The appellants are citizens of India. They arrived in Australia on 19 June 2006. On 28 June 2006 the appellants lodged an application for protection visas with the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (as it was then known). A delegate of the first respondent refused the application for protection visas on 15 July 2006. On 11 August 2006 the appellants applied to the Tribunal for a review of that decision. 3 The appellants, who are from Gujarat, are a husband and wife aged 38 and 36 years respectively. Only the appellant husband made claims under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 and amended under the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees 1967 (the Convention) with the appellant wife relying on membership of his family unit. As only the appellant husband made claims to a fear of persecution, he will be referred to as the appellant.