Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZKTB v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 918
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) SZKTB v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 2456 of 2007
REEVES J
13 JUNE 2008
DARWIN
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2456 of 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKTB
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: REEVES J DATE OF ORDER: 13 JUNE 2008
WHERE MADE: DARWIN
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $3,500.00. 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 2456 of 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZKTB
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: REEVES J
DATE: 13 JUNE 2008
PLACE: DARWIN
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT – Revised from transcript
INTRODUCTION 1 The appellant is a citizen of the People's Republic of China ('China'). She came to Australia on Chinese passport on 15 December 2006. On 29 December 2006, she lodged an application for a protection visa (class XA). In the statutory declaration attached to her application she stated that she and her family were Falun Gong practitioners and that was the cause of her persecution in China.
BACKGROUND – SUMMARY OF FACTS 2 The Minister's delegate refused the appellant's application in a decision dated 3 February 2007. The appellant then sought to review that decision before the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal'). 3 In her evidence before the Tribunal the appellant resiled from her claim that she was a Falun Gong practitioner and that her family was persecuted for that reason. Instead, she claimed that her family had been persecuted by the local village committee because they had opposed the demolition of the family home by the local village committee. 4 The Tribunal confirmed the delegate's decision in its decision handed down on 8 May 2007. 5 The appellant then made an application to the Federal Magistrates Court for constitutional writ relief, seeking judicial review of the Tribunal's decision. Federal Magistrate Cameron dismissed that application in a decision delivered on 29 November 2007. This appeal follows from that decision. For the reasons set out below, I do not consider that Federal Magistrate Cameron committed any reviewable error and I therefore order that this appeal be dismissed.
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