WZAVX v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 411

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WZAVX v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 411 Appeal from: WZAVX v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 2578

File number(s): WAD 576 of 2015

Judge(s): SIOPIS J

Date of judgment: 21 April 2016

Date of hearing: 9 February 2016

Registry: Western Australia

Division: General Division

National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights

Category: No Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 39

Counsel for the Appellant: The appellant appeared in person by video link.

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R French

Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS WAD 576 of 2016

BETWEEN: WZAVX Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION Respondent

JUDGE: SIOPIS J DATE OF ORDER: 21 april 2016

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The appellant is to pay the respondent's costs. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

SIOPIS J: 1 This is an appeal from a decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia delivered on 16 September 2015, dismissing the appellant's application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) made on 12 January 2015. 2 The appellant is a citizen of Bangladesh. 3 The appellant first arrived in Australia on a student visa on 16 July 2004, which was due to expire on 31 January 2006. The appellant's student visa was cancelled on 19 January 2006. Following the cancellation of his student visa, the appellant was granted a bridging visa which expired on 31 January 2006. The appellant thereafter remained unlawfully in Australia until located on 16 March 2014, whereupon he was placed in immigration detention. 4 On 25 March 2014, the appellant lodged an application for a protection visa. 5 In his protection visa application, the appellant claimed that he feared he would be targeted and killed because of his political opinions and religious beliefs were he to be returned to Bangladesh. The appellant also claimed that he feared persecution because of his blogging activities. 6 On 5 May 2014, a delegate of the respondent rejected the appellant's protection visa application. The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the delegate. As mentioned, the Federal Circuit Court dismissed the appellant's application for judicial review of the Tribunal's decision.