SZBQV v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1242

SZBQV v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1242

Leave to appeal was refused because the Federal Magistrate's order was interlocutory and required leave, the applicants failed to show error of principle in the refusal to set aside the self-executing orders, and the second further amended application did not disclose any arguable jurisdictional error by the Refugee Review Tribunal. The procedural fairness and s 424A argument failed because no particular undisclosed information was identified and the country information would fall within s 424A(3); the prudence or discretion argument failed because the Tribunal made findings of fact about likely future conduct and risk rather than imposing an unlawful condition; and the remaining...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders of a Federal Magistrate Confirming Self Executing Orders Dismissing an Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'section 424 a of the Migration Act' 'self Executing Orders' 'leave to Appeal' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'section 424 a of the Migration Act' 'self Executing Orders' 'leave to Appeal' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders of a Federal Magistrate Confirming Self Executing Orders Dismissing an Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal was required because the Federal Magistrate's order confirming the self-executing orders was interlocutory." 'Whether the Federal Magistrate erred in refusing to set aside the self-executing orders after the applicants failed to serve and properly particularise the further amended application.' 'Whether the second further amended application disclosed an arguable case of jurisdictional error by the Refugee Review Tribunal.' 'Whether there was an arguable denial of procedural fairness or breach of s 424A of the Migration Act concerning country information.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal imposed an unlawful prudence or discretion requirement contrary to Appellant S 395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to apply the tests for persecution stated in Chan Yee Kin v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Haji Ibrahim.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the Federal Magistrate's order was interlocutory and required leave, the applicants failed to show error of principle in the refusal to set aside the self-executing orders, and the second further amended application did not disclose any arguable jurisdictional error by the Refugee Review Tribunal. The procedural fairness and s 424A argument failed because no particular undisclosed information was identified and the country information would fall within s 424A(3); the prudence or discretion argument failed because the Tribunal made findings of fact about likely future conduct and risk rather than imposing an unlawful condition; and the remaining...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • ['That the leave to appeal be refused.' "The applicant pay the respondent's costs."]