SZVML v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 564

SZVML v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 564

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not establish that the primary judge's decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration or that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused. The proposed grounds either invited impermissible merits review of the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings or disclosed no appellable error by the primary judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From a Judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and the application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'credibility Findings' 'impermissible Merits Review']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'credibility Findings' 'impermissible Merits Review']

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 a Judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to appeal the Federal Circuit Court's dismissal of the applicant's judicial review application" 'Whether the proposed grounds disclosed appellable error by the primary judge' "Whether the applicant's complaints about the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings invited impermissible merits review" "Whether the primary judge erred in dealing with the applicant's evidence concerning injuries, travel to Israel, and medical conditions"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not establish that the primary judge's decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration or that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused. The proposed grounds either invited impermissible merits review of the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings or disclosed no appellable error by the primary judge.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and the application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be refused and the application dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or taxed."]