Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte "A" [2001] HCA 77

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIRBY J

RE THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND

MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

EX PARTE "A" APPLICANT/PROSECUTOR

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte "A"

[2001] HCA 77

21 December 2001

P16/2001

ORDER

1. Application refused. 2. Applicant/prosecutor to pay second respondent's costs of and incidental to the application.

Representation:

C M Chang for the applicant/prosecutor (instructed by Verschuer Edward Solicitors)

No appearance for the first respondent

M T Ritter for the second respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte "A"

Immigration – Refugees – Application for protection visa on the ground of refugee status – Fear of persecution – Application to High Court for constitutional writs and other relief – Whether arguable breach of requirements of natural justice by delegate of Minister becomes irrelevant following later merits review by Refugee Review Tribunal – Whether breach of procedural requirements of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in failure of Tribunal to refer to allegation of torture – Whether breach of requirements of natural justice in failure to disclose country information to applicant concerning country of nationality – Whether Tribunal erred in treatment of applicant's protest activities in Australia post-arrival – Whether reasonably arguable case for grant of order nisi.

Immigration – Refugees – Application in original jurisdiction of High Court – Earlier decisions by the Minister's delegate, Refugee Review Tribunal and Federal Court – Whether applicant out of time for constitutional writs in application in original jurisdiction of High Court – Whether delay in commencement of High Court proceedings pending conclusion of proceedings below was explained and reasonable – Whether it was reasonably arguable that time default would be cured in circumstances of the applicant's prompt application to the High Court following final decision of Full Federal Court.