MZXAF v MIMA

[2006] HCATrans 550

[2006] HCATrans 550

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Melbourne  No M61 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

MZXAF

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL 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, 5 OCTOBER 2006, AT 9.15 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant, a citizen of India, applied for a protection visa on 21 October 1994.  A delegate of the first respondent refused the application.  The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed that decision, but the applicant succeeded in obtaining orders for judicial review from the Federal Court of Australia.  The Tribunal affirmed the delegate’s decision again, but another application to the Federal Court of Australia succeeded.

After the third hearing before the Tribunal, on 18 May 2000 it affirmed the delegate’s decision on the ground that there was no real chance of the applicant being persecuted on returning to India, and that it would not be unreasonable for him to relocate to an area outside the Punjab if he subjectively feared persecution there. 

An application by the applicant for judicial review to the Federal Court of Australia was dismissed by North J.  An application by the applicant to this Court was remitted to Heerey J in the Federal Court of Australia.  He dismissed it.  A Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia dismissed an attempt by the applicant to appeal without leave.

The applicant then commenced fresh proceedings for judicial review in the Federal Magistrates Court.  Riethmuller FM dismissed that application as an abuse of process and ordered that the applicant institute no further applications without leave.  The applicant then made a further application without leave.  Riethmuller FM dismissed it because leave had not been sought or obtained. 

The Federal Court of Australia (Gray J) dismissed an application for leave to appeal on the ground that the last application to Riethmuller FM was incompetent as having been brought without leave. 

The applicant’s application for special leave to appeal does not attempt to demonstrate error in that conclusion, and the application must be 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 9.17 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED