VJAG of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 55 (26 February 2004)

Last Updated: 12 March 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant VJAG of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 55

APPLICANT VJAG OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

V 897 of 2003


















WHITLAM, MARSHALL and FINKELSTEIN JJ
MELBOURNE
26 FEBRUARY 2004

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 897 of 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT VJAG OF 2003 APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGES:	WHITLAM, MARSHALL and FINKELSTEIN JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The appellant pay the respondent’s taxed costs of the appeal.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 897 of 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT VJAG OF 2003 APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	WHITLAM, MARSHALL and FINKELSTEIN JJ
DATE:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

WHITLAM J:

1 This is an appeal from a judgment of a judge of the Court, dismissing with costs an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) made on 29 August 2002. The Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent not to grant the appellant a protection visa.

2 The proceeding in the Court below was instituted with the assistance of a solicitor. However, at the hearing the appellant was unrepresented. The grounds of review in the original application were not pursued in the Court below, and the appellant mounted a challenge to the Tribunal’s decision on a different basis. The case he advanced was comprehensively dealt with by the primary judge in his reasons for judgment.

3 The grounds of appeal in the notice of appeal argued before the Full Court today raise substantially the same points that were dealt with by the primary judge. On the hearing of his appeal the appellant once more has the misfortune to be acting for himself. However, a comprehensive set of submissions has been prepared by a barrister appointed pursuant to a referral under O 80 of the Federal Court Rules. In addition, the Court has been greatly assisted in its attention to this appeal, by the very helpful and comprehensive submissions in writing prepared by counsel for the respondent. It is apparent, from a reading of those submissions, that the primary judge dealt with every matter that was raised in the Court below or could have been raised in relation to the grounds in the appellant’s notice of appeal. The appeal is utterly hopeless and, in my view, should be dismissed with costs.

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

Associate:

Dated:

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 897 of 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT VJAG OF 2003 APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	WHITLAM, MARSHALL and FINKELSTEIN JJ
DATE:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

MARSHALL J:

4 I agree with the reasons for judgment of Whitlam J and with the order he proposes.

I certify that the preceding paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Marshall.

Associate:

Dated:

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 897 of 2003

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT VJAG OF 2003 APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	WHITLAM, MARSHALL and FINKELSTEIN JJ
DATE:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

FINKELSTEIN J:

5 I also agree.

I certify that the preceding paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Finkelstein.

Associate:

Dated:

Counsel for the applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the respondent:	S P Donaghue
Solicitor for the respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of hearing:	26 February 2004
Date of judgment:	26 February 2004