S255 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2006] FCA 97 (14 February 2006)

Last Updated: 21 February 2006

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

S255 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2006] FCA 97

MIGRATION – no point of principle































S255 of 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
NSD 2328/2005

MOORE J
14 FEBRUARY 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 2328 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	S255 of 2003 APPLICANT
AND:	REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL FIRST RESPONDENT SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS SECOND RESPONDENT COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:	14 FEBRUARY 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application for leave to appeal from the decision of Graham J on 8 November 2005 be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay the costs of the second and third respondents.

3. Costs be fixed in the sum of $700.

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 2328 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	S255 of 2003 APPLICANT
AND:	REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL FIRST RESPONDENT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS SECOND RESPONDENT COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE:	14 FEBRUARY 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of Graham J of 8 November 2005: S255/2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal & Ors [2005] FCA 1573. His Honour was dealing with an application for an order nisi seeking constitutional writs directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal"). It is unnecessary to rehearse the facts that were set out by his Honour in his reasons for judgment. It is sufficient to note that the ground of appeal identified in the notice of appeal filed on 25 November 2005 is that:

The applicant was not afforded procedural fairness when the country information report submitted by the appellant was not considered. The application should have been decided based on matters prevailing AT THE TIME the decision is made.

2 The applicant for leave to appeal has not been able to draw my attention to any evidence which would provide a factual foundation for the assertion contained in the notice of appeal. This is apparent from the reasons for judgment of Graham J. To the extent that any material has been produced in the present proceedings which suggests that the Tribunal has not considered material furnished to it, it is material that post dates the hearing and decision of the Tribunal.

3 This appeal has no prospects of success and in those circumstances, leave is refused with costs.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore .

Associate:

Dated: 21 February 2006

The Applicant appeared in person
Solicitor for the Second and Third Respondents:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	14 February 2006
Date of Judgment:	14 February 2006