SZBJQ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1453

SZBJQ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1453

The application for leave to appeal had no substance and was an abuse of process. The Tribunal's second decision was correct because it had no jurisdiction to revisit the same delegate's protection visa refusal after its 2003 review decision, and the applicant had repeatedly and unsuccessfully litigated challenges to that same refusal up to the High Court. The Court therefore refused leave and restrained further applications concerning the same decisions without leave of a judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Leave to Appeal Refused
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay costs; applicant restrained from making further applications concerning the specified Tribunal and delegate decisions without leave of a judge of the Court.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'jurisdictional Error' 'natural Justice' 'abuse of Process' 'leave to Appeal' 'preclusion and Time Limits']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'jurisdictional Error' 'natural Justice' 'abuse of Process' 'leave to Appeal' 'preclusion and Time Limits']

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 the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Leave to Appeal Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should have leave to appeal from Scarlett FM's decision dismissing his challenge to the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision of 5 April 2007." "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the applicant's second application for review after it had already reviewed the delegate's decision of 14 April 2003." "Whether the applicant's repeated proceedings concerning the same protection visa refusal were an abuse of process." 'Whether the applicant should be restrained from bringing further proceedings concerning the same decisions without leave of a judge of the Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal had no substance and was an abuse of process. The Tribunal's second decision was correct because it had no jurisdiction to revisit the same delegate's protection visa refusal after its 2003 review decision, and the applicant had repeatedly and unsuccessfully litigated challenges to that same refusal up to the High Court. The Court therefore refused leave and restrained further applications concerning the same decisions without leave of a judge.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay costs; applicant restrained from making further applications concerning the specified Tribunal and delegate decisions without leave of a judge of the Court.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is refused.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $900." 'The applicant make no further application to the Federal Magistrates Court or this Court in respect of the decisions of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 9 July 2003 and handed down on 6...