Bhuiyan and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2585/2011, 2599/2011) [2011] ZAECPEHC 40 (15 September 2011)

Bhuiyan and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2585/2011, 2599/2011) [2011] ZAECPEHC 40 (15 September 2011)

The court found that the applicants were not genuine asylum seekers but economic migrants who fabricated their accounts to circumvent the Immigration Act. Documentary evidence, particularly the applicants' passports, contradicted their claims and demonstrated that their entry into South Africa was unlawful. The court held that the Immigration Act applies to all persons entering the Republic in contravention of its provisions, and mere intention to apply for asylum does not trigger the Refugees Act. The applicants' conduct constituted an abuse of the urgent application procedure, and their applications were dismissed. The court further found that punitive costs were warranted given the...

Citation
[2011] ZAECPEHC 40
Parties
Applicant: Ali Bhuiyan; Applicant: Nur Islam; Applicant: Iftehar Ahmed; Applicant: Mosarof Mosarof; Applicant: Riad Howlader; Applicant: Yousuf Iqbal; Applicant: Saiful Islam Rana; Applicant: Akash Rajnibhai; Applicant: Sayed Mohammed Fazul Alam; Applicant: Iman Hossain; Applicant: Rasel Golam; Applicant: Kadire Ibiro Ersumo; Respondent: Minister of Home Affairs; Respondent: Director General: Department of Home Affairs
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 September 2011
Case Number
2585/2011, 2599/2011
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination After Interim Relief and Postponement
Outcome
Applications dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
Chetty
Legal Topics
Urgent Application Procedure, Immigration Act, Refugees Act, Abuse of Process, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Urgent Application Procedure Immigration Act Refugees Act Abuse of Process Costs Orders

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

Ali Bhuiyan

Applicant

Nur Islam

Applicant

Iftehar Ahmed

Applicant

Mosarof Mosarof

Applicant

Riad Howlader

Applicant

Yousuf Iqbal

Applicant

Saiful Islam Rana

Applicant

Akash Rajnibhai

Applicant

Sayed Mohammed Fazul Alam

Applicant

Iman Hossain

Applicant

Rasel Golam

Applicant

Kadire Ibiro Ersumo

Applicant

Minister of Home Affairs

Respondent

Director General: Department of Home Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination After Interim Relief and Postponement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to urgent relief as asylum seekers under the Refugees Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Immigration Act applies to the applicants prior to formal recognition as refugees.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' conduct constitutes an abuse of urgent application procedure.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants were not genuine asylum seekers but economic migrants who fabricated their accounts to circumvent the Immigration Act. Documentary evidence, particularly the applicants' passports, contradicted their claims and demonstrated that their entry into South Africa was unlawful. The court held that the Immigration Act applies to all persons entering the Republic in contravention of its provisions, and mere intention to apply for asylum does not trigger the Refugees Act. The applicants' conduct constituted an abuse of the urgent application procedure, and their applications were dismissed. The court further found that punitive costs were warranted given the...

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • In each of the matters, case numbers 2585/2011, 2586/2011, 2587/2011, 2588/2011, 2589/2011, 2590/2011, 2591/2011, 2592/2011, 2593/2011, 2594/2011, 2595/2011 and 2599/2011, the applications are dismissed with costs on a scale as between attorney and client.