Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZIYY v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 366
SZIYY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 1864 OF 2007
BRANSON J
20 MARCH 2008
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1864 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZIYY
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: BRANSON J DATE OF ORDER: 20 MARCH 2008
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent. 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 1864 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZIYY
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: BRANSON J
DATE: 20 MARCH 2008
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The appellant is a citizen of Syria. She arrived in Australia on 9 April 2005 as the holder of a prospective spouse visa. She was engaged to be married to an Australian citizen. On 14 October 2005 she applied to the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs for a protection Class XA visa (s 36 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act")). 2 The appellant sought the protection of Australia as she claimed that as a result of the break down of her engagement she would be considered a disgraced woman in Syria and was at risk of being a target for an honour killing. 3 A delegate of the Minister refused to grant the visa on 20 January 2006 and the appellant applied for a review of the decision to the Refuge Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") on 30 January 2006. The Tribunal held a hearing at which the appellant was represented by a Migration agent and to which she brought witnesses. The appellant gave evidence at the hearing. On 30 May 2006 the Tribunal published its reasons for affirming the decision of the delegate. The Tribunal found that the appellant had been untruthful and that her claim and evidence were lacking in credibility. In light of these findings the Tribunal gave no weight to the documents the appellant relied on or to her witnesses. 4 On 26 June 2006 the appellant applied to the Federal Magistrates Court for a review of the Tribunal's decision. The appellant relied on three grounds. First that the Tribunal, in considering independent country evidence, relied on irrelevant material, secondly that the Tribunal's decision was affected by apprehended bias and thirdly that the Tribunal had breached s 425 of the Act by failing to give the appellant a genuine and realistic opportunity to present her case. On 23 August 2007 the Federal Magistrate dismissed the application for review. The learned Federal Magistrate found that although there may have been misconception of the evidence by the Tribunal this did not constitute a jurisdictional error. Her Honour further found that the Tribunal member was not affected by bias and the appellant was not denied an opportunity to present her case. 5 This is an appeal from the decision of the Federal Magistrate.
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