AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

High Court of Australia Transcripts

You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> High Court of Australia Transcripts >> 2007 >> [2007] HCATrans 29

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Documents | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

SZGTU v MIMIA & Anor [2007] HCATrans 29 (8 February 2007)

Last Updated: 26 March 2007

[2007] HCATrans 029


IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Sydney No S205 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

SZGTU

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders


GUMMOW J
HEYDON J


TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 2007, AT 9.17 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J: The applicant is a citizen of China who claims to fear persecution as a Falun Gong practitioner. He alleged that in 2002 in China he had been detained and tortured by the police for a month. The applicant’s claim for a protection visa was rejected by a delegate of the respondent. Subsequently, the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) found that many of the applicant’s claims were vague and lacking in detail. The Tribunal invited the applicant to make further submissions to support his claim. No further submissions were received, and the applicant did not attend the Tribunal hearing. The Tribunal concluded that it could not be satisfied that the applicant is a Falun Gong practitioner, or that he was detained and harmed by Chinese authorities.

The applicant sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Magistrates Court. Smith FM dismissed the application on the basis that there had been no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal. In the Federal Court Siopis J found no error in the reasoning of Smith FM and dismissed the application.

The applicant’s case before this Court discloses no question of law to justify a grant of special leave. No jurisdictional error has been disclosed at any stage of proceedings. There would be no prospects of success on any appeal to this Court from the Federal Court, and accordingly special leave is refused.

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 Heydon J and myself.

AT 9.18 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCATrans/2007/29.html