SZAJL v MIMIA [2005] HCATrans 393 (16 June 2005)

--

SZAJL v MIMIA [2005] HCATrans 393 (16 June 2005)

Last Updated: 28 June 2005

[2005] HCATrans 393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Sydney No S349 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

SZAJL

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GLEESON CJ
GUMMOW J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 16 JUNE 2005, AT 9.19 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GLEESON CJ: The applicant is a citizen of India and a Moslem. He claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of religious persecution by the Shiv Sena organisation, which is said to be an extremist Hindu organisation that engages in criminal activities, including extortion.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had a fear of persecution. However it did not accept that the persecution was for a Convention reason, because it was for criminal rather than religious reasons, and it further considered that the Indian authorities could and would provide the applicant with effective protection against any persecutory conduct by non-state actors according to the decision of this Court in Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Khawar [2002] HCA 14; (2002) 210 CLR 1.

The applicant sought review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Magistrates Court. That Court dismissed the application as no jurisdictional error in the decision of the Tribunal had been demonstrated. The Full Court of the Federal Court (Beaumont, Merkel and Hely JJ) dismissed an appeal.

We have reviewed the written submissions and the decisions of the Tribunal, the Federal Magistrates Court and the Full Court of the Federal Court. There are insufficient prospects of success in any appeal to this Court from the Full Court of the Federal Court to warrant a grant of special leave. Further, it appears that on 18 May 2005 the applicant left Australia. Special leave to appeal is refused with costs.

Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing this application for special leave with costs.

AT 9.20 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED