Applicant S193/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1562

Applicant S193/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1562

The applicant's grounds were not fairly arguable, as the Tribunal did consider the relevant documents, including those favourable to the applicant, and the evidence did not establish persecution or failure of state protection. No particularised claim of procedural fairness was demonstrated.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant S193/2003; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Mrs Patricia Leehy, Member Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: The Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / On Remittal From the High Court, Application for Order Nisi
Outcome
application for order nisi refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Protection Visa, Refugee Status, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Migration Law Judicial Review Protection Visa Refugee Status Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant S193/2003

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Mrs Patricia Leehy, Member Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

The Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / On Remittal From the High Court, Application for Order Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred in law in affirming the refusal of a protection visa
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness by the Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's grounds were not fairly arguable, as the Tribunal did consider the relevant documents, including those favourable to the applicant, and the evidence did not establish persecution or failure of state protection. No particularised claim of procedural fairness was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

application for order nisi refused

Orders

  • Subrule (1) of Order 51A rule 5 not apply to this application.
  • The application for an order nisi be refused.