Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZKLZ v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2008] FCA 262
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) SZCIA v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 238 SZEZI v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1195 SZKLZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 2279 OF 2007
EDMONDS J
6 MARCH 2008
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2279 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKLZ
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: EDMONDS J
DATE OF ORDER: 6 MARCH 2008
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the first respondent's costs. 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 2279 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKLZ
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: EDMONDS J
DATE: 6 MARCH 2008
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court (SZKLZ v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship & Anor [2007] FMCA 1851 (Emmett FM)) dismissing an application for review of a decision of the second respondent ('the Tribunal') affirming a decision of a delegate of the first respondent ('the Minister') refusing the appellant's application for a protection visa.
Background 2 The appellant is a citizen of the People's Republic of China ('PRC') and arrived in Australia on 30 September 2006. She applied for a protection visa on 4 October 2006. 3 The appellant claimed to be entitled to a protection visa by reason of her fear of persecution by the authorities in China by reason of being a Falun Gong practitioner. 4 On 5 December 2006 the delegate refused the appellant a protection visa on the basis that she was not a person to whom Australia had protection obligations. The delegate found the appellant's claim in relation to Falun Gong to be 'general and unsubstantiated'. The delegate found that the appellant provided no evidence to satisfy the delegate that she had faced adverse attention of any kind from the PRC authorities.
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