NAXN v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 162 (5 March 2004)

Last Updated: 5 March 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAXN v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 162

NAXN & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 1839 of 2003

ALLSOP J
5 MARCH 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1839 of 2003

BETWEEN:	NAXN FIRST APPLICANT NAXO SECOND APPLICANT NAXP THIRD APPLICANT NAXQ FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:	5 MARCH 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application be dismissed.
2. The first and second applicants pay the respondent’s 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	N 1839 of 2003

BETWEEN:	NAXN FIRST APPLICANT NAXO SECOND APPLICANT NAXP THIRD APPLICANT NAXQ FOURTH APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE:	5 MARCH 2004
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 On 11 February 2004, I made orders that this matter stand over to 25 February 2004 to allow the parties to consider their position in relation to a question arising under or involving the interpretation of the Constitution. On the same day I handed down reasons which, subject to any constitutional question, dealt with all arguments put on behalf of the applicants in respect of their claim for relief under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal which had affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister to refuse protection visas to the applicants.

2 Shortly prior to 25 February 2004, the solicitor for the applicants indicated to my chambers that there was to be no constitutional question taken. With that intimation it is plain that I have now dealt with all relevant matters.

3 In the above circumstances, the application of the applicants will be dismissed.

4 The applicants are a family. The application was brought by husband and wife on behalf of themselves and their children. I do not propose to make an order for costs against the children.

5 The orders of the Court are:

1. the application be dismissed;

2. the first and second applicants pay the respondent’s costs.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop.

Associate:

Dated: 5 March 2004

Solicitor for the Applicant:	Mr T Silva
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr D Jordan
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	5 February 2004
Date of Judgment:	5 March 2004