Specialist in Australian Immigration, Migration Consultant and Online Australian Visa Assessment Service.
Australian Immigration Specialists - Australian Immigration Consultants Online Australian Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia
  Research Home

Categories
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Federal Court
Federal Magistrates Court
Full Federal Court
High Court
Migration Review Tribunal
Other Jurisdictions
Refugee Review Tribunal
Recently Added
Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51 (6 September 2001)
Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] HCA 43 (9 September 2004)
Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal; Lie v Refugee Review Tribunal [2002] HCA 30

"Use the Migration Specialists that migration agents use"
Cases

MIGRATION - Review of RRT decision - application for protection visa - fear of persecution for reasons of religion - credibility of evidence - no appearance by applicant.

NASB v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 352 (20 December 2002)

NASB v Minister for Immigration [2002] FMCA 352 (20 December 2002)
Last Updated: 16 January 2003

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NASB v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION
[2002] FMCA 352



MIGRATION - Review of RRT decision - application for protection visa - fear of persecution for reasons of religion - credibility of evidence - no appearance by applicant.



Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s.474

Applicant:
NASB



Respondent:


MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS



File No:


SZ 679 of 2002



Delivered on:


20 December 2002



Delivered at:


Sydney



Hearing date:


20 December 2002



Judgment of:


Raphael FM



REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant:


Applicant self-represented



Counsel for the Respondent:


Mr Tim Reilly



Solicitors for the Respondent:


Wardell Chambers



ORDERS

(1) Application dismissed.

(2) Applicant to pay the respondent's costs in the sum of $4000.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES

COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT

SYDNEY


SZ 679 of 2002

NASB


Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL

& INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS




Respondent


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This matter was set down for hearing at 2.15pm on 20 December 2002. At 2.35pm there was no appearance for the applicant. His name was called three times outside the court without response. The respondent has asked that I dismiss the application pursuant to order 32, rule 2(C) of the Federal Court rules.

2. The applicant is an Indian citizen who arrived in Australia on 4 August 2000 on an Indian passport. On 30 August 2000 he lodged an application for a Protection (class XA) Visa. On 8 November 2000 a delegate of the Minister refused to grant the visa. On 30 November 2000 the applicant applied for a review of that decision. The review was carried out by the Refugee Review Tribunal and a decision was made on 18 June 2002. The decision was handed down on 10 July 2002. It is against that decision that the applicant seeks review. I have considered the reasons for decision produced by the Tribunal. At [CB 216 para 96], the Tribunal said:

"Accordingly, I am unable to accept that the applicant converted to Christianity in India, and consequently, I am unable to accept that the harm and persecution that he claimed flowed from that conversion happened. Similarly, I am unable to accept that the applicant's conversion to Christianity in Australia was for any reason other than to provide for himself the profile of a refugee. Consequently I am not satisfied that the applicant has a well founded fear of persecution in India for reasons of his religion. Further, I am not satisfied that the applicant has a well founded fear of persecution in the foreseeable future if he was to return to India by reason of his religion or for any other convention reason."

3. The decision of the Tribunal was critical of the applicant on a number of bases. They included the admitted forging by the applicant of a document concerning his baptism and a letter from a Bishop Dycueco. The grounds of appeal filed by the applicant do not of themselves relate to any matter upon which review is permitted following the imposition into the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) of s.474. In the circumstances it is appropriate to dismiss this appeal pursuant to Order 32(2)(c) of the Federal Court Rules.

4. I would assess the costs of the applicant in the sum of $4000 pursuant to Part 21, rule 21.02(2)(a) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Associate:

Date:
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia