Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZNER v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 1297
SZNER and SZNES v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 980 of 2009
SIOPIS J
13 NOVEMBER 2009
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
general division NSD 980 of 2009
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZNER
First Appellant
SZNES
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: SIOPIS J
DATE OF ORDER: 13 NOVEMBER 2009
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal of each of the first and second appellants is dismissed. 2. The appellants are to pay the first respondent's costs in the sum of $3,500. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court's website.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
general division NSD 980 of 2009
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZNER
First Appellant
SZNES
Second Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: SIOPIS J
DATE: 13 NOVEMBER 2009
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The appellants are citizens of the People's Republic of China who arrived in Australia on 17 June 2008. On 27 June 2008, the appellants lodged an application for a protection visa with the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. A delegate of the first respondent (the Minister) refused the application for a protection visa on 18 August 2008. On 10 September 2008, the appellants applied to the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) for a review of that decision. 2 Before the Tribunal, the appellant wife (the first appellant) claimed to fear persecution because she converted to Christianity in 2000 and became a member of an underground church. The appellant husband (the second appellant) claimed to have been arrested and imprisoned from January 1997 to January 2000 as a result of being charged with a "groundless crime – Intent Harm". After he was released he followed his wife into the Christian religion and he also became a member of the underground church. The appellants claimed to have attended church services in Hurstville, New South Wales, since they arrived in Australia.
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