Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZFCE v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 966
SZFCE and SZFCF v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 179 of 2008
RARES J
12 MAY 2008
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 179 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZFCE
First Appellant
SZFCF
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RARES J
DATE OF ORDER: 12 MAY 2008
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal is dismissed with 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 179 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZFCE
First Appellant
SZFCF
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RARES J
DATE: 12 MAY 2008
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT) 1 The appellants are mother and daughter. They are citizens of India who arrived in Australia on 17 June 2000 and applied for protection visas in late September 2000. On three separate occasions, the Refugee Review Tribunal has considered their application for review of the Minister's delegate's refusal on 20 October 2000, to grant them those visas. Two previous tribunal decisions were set aside, leading to the third decision being made on 28 July 2006 and handed down on 15 August 2006. 2 The Federal Magistrates Court rejected the daughter's and the mother's application for constitutional writ relief from the 2006 decision of the tribunal: SZFCE & Anor and Minister for Immigration [2008] FMCA 52. The mother did not file an appeal from that decision, but at the commencement of the hearing last week, the solicitor appearing for her and her daughter asked for the mother to be joined as an appellant. The Minister did not object to that course and I thus extended the time in which the mother could appeal and ordered that she be joined as an appellant on the existing notice of appeal. This morning, an amended notice of appeal has been filed in court to which I will return.
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