SZHWV v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 2019 (19 May 2008)

Last Updated: 11 February 2009

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZHWV v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 2019

SZHWV v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 161 of 2008

MOORE J
19 MAY 2008
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 161 of 2008

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZHWV Applicant
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:	19 MAY 2008
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal be dismissed with costs.
   

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using eSearch on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 161 of 2008

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZHWV Applicant
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE:	19 MAY 2008
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal against a judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 20 December 2007: SZHWV v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2007] FMCA 2097. The Federal Magistrate dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. The Tribunal gave its decision on 21 October 2005, and affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant is a Christian from Lebanon, and had been a member and supporter of the Lebanese forces. The Tribunal accepted the substance of the applicant’s account of events in Lebanon before he came to Australia. The Tribunal ultimately concluded, however, that the evidence of the applicant about his experiences in Lebanon, and his views about what might happen to him, and having regard to country information, were not such as to enable the Tribunal to be satisfied that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution were he to return.
2. In the proceedings before the Federal Magistrate, there were seven grounds raised in the application, together with particulars not attributable to any specific ground, as well as particulars that did not relate to any of the specified grounds. The import of the Federal Magistrate’s decision was that the applicant sought to challenge various findings made by the Tribunal and its fundamental assessment that the applicant would not suffer harm, or was unlikely to suffer harm were he to return to Lebanon, to found the ultimate conclusion that he did not have a well-founded fear of persecution.
3. It is not apparent to me that the Federal Magistrate erred in his consideration of the various grounds raised by the applicant, and similarly, it is not apparent to me that the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error in its consideration of the application of the applicant. While the application for leave to appeal was filed after the time for appealing had passed, I am not particularly concerned about the delay, particularly having regard to the time of year at which the Federal Magistrate gave his judgment, together with the fact that the applicant is an unrepresented litigant who did not have the benefit of legal advice.
4. However, I am not satisfied that any of the grounds that the applicant seeks to raise in the appeal have any prospects of success. In those circumstances, I am not satisfied there are special reasons for extending time. I order that the applicant for an extension of time be dismissed with costs.
   

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.

Associate:

Dated: 11 February 2009

The Applicant appeared in person.
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	DLA Phillips Fox

Date of Hearing:	19 May 2008
Date of Judgment:	19 May 2008