Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZLUI v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 1318
SZLUI and SZLUJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 862 of 2008
RARES J
20 AUGUST 2008
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 862 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZLUI
First Appellant
SZLUJ
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RARES J
DATE OF ORDER: 20 AUGUST 2008
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The appellants pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1,800. 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 862 of 2008
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZLUI
First Appellant
SZLUJ
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: RARES J
DATE: 20 AUGUST 2008
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT) 1 This is an appeal from a decision of the Federal Magistrates Court refusing the appellants' claim for constitutional writ relief against a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal to affirm a decision of the delegate of the Minister not to grant the appellants protection visas: SZLUI v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FMCA 843. When the appeal was called on this morning, only the male appellant appeared. He told me that his wife, the female appellant, was at home and that he was representing her. 2 The appellants are citizens of India who arrived in Australia in March 2007 and applied for protection visas in May 2007. The husband alone made a claim for protection as a refugee and his wife applied as a member of his family unit. The delegate refused to grant the visas on 28 May 2007 and they applied to the tribunal for a review of that decision.
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