SZCOX v MIMA & Anor [2007] HCATrans 168 (27 April 2007)

Last Updated: 8 May 2007

[2007] HCATrans 168

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Sydney No S277 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

SZCOX

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON FRIDAY, 27 APRIL 2007, AT 9.20 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J: The applicant is a Sikh medical practitioner, and a citizen of India who claims to have been an active supporter and general secretary of the youth wing of the Akali Dal Party. In January 2002 he claimed that he had been in charge of the Akali Dal candidate's campaign for the general assembly and that he was detained and tortured by the police on at least four occasions, and that his wife was sexually assaulted, as a result of his involvement with the Akali Dal Party.

The Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") found that the applicant had exaggerated his claims to enhance his claims to refugee status, that the mistreatment of his wife did not amount to a Convention-related reason, and that the applicant and his wife could relocate within Punjab without any real chance of them suffering harm that would amount to persecution.

The applicant was represented in the Federal Magistrates Court, where Emmett FM upheld the Tribunal's findings as being open to the Tribunal on the material before it. In the Federal Court, Branson J ruled that the Tribunal's findings on internal relocation constituted an independent basis upon which to reject the applicant's claim. Her Honour further held that there was no Wednesbury unreasonableness in the Tribunal's decision and that the applicant's other contentions about s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) were misconceived.

In the case before this Court, the applicant has not identified any jurisdictional error by the Tribunal. There would be insufficient prospects of success on any appeal to this Court from the Federal Court to justify a grant of special leave.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave.

I publish the disposition signed by Justice Heydon and myself.

AT 9.22 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED