SZFIR v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 885

SZFIR v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 885

The application for leave to appeal is itself an abuse of process, as it lacks merit and merely seeks to re-agitate matters already determined adversely to the applicant in previous litigation; consequently, there is no prospect of success, and leave to appeal should be refused.

Parties
Applicant: SZFIR; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Citizenship; Second Respondent: Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal From Federal Magistrates Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Constitutional Writ Relief, Protection Visa, Vexatious Litigation

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SZFIR

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

First Respondent

Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal From Federal Magistrates Court

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Magistrates Court decision dismissing the applicant's second application for constitutional writ relief as incompetent and an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's repeated applications constitute an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal is itself an abuse of process, as it lacks merit and merely seeks to re-agitate matters already determined adversely to the applicant in previous litigation; consequently, there is no prospect of success, and leave to appeal should be refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the first respondent's costs.