SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration (No.2)

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZGIZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION (No.2)

[2012] FMCA 970

MIGRATION – Application for transfer to the Federal Court of Australia – application granted.

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration [2012] FMCA 969
SZRWI v Minister for Immigration [2012] FMCA 968
SZRVV v Minister for Immigration [2012] FMCA 967

Applicant:

SZGIZ

Respondent:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

File Number:

SYG 2253 of 2012

Judgment of:

Nicholls FM

Hearing date:

18 October 2012

Date of Last Submission:

18 October 2012

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

18 October 2012

REPRESENTATION

Appearing for the Applicant:

Mr M Jones

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Parish Patience Immigration Lawyers

Appearing for the Respondent:

Ms E Baggett

Solicitors for the Respondent:

DLA Piper Australia

ORDERS

Pursuant to s.39 of the Federal Magistrates Court Act 1999 (Cth) and r.8.02 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), the matter be transferred to the NSW Registry of the Federal Court of Australia.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 2253 of 2012

SZGIZ

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex tempore; Revised from Transcript)

By way of application made on 11 October 2012, pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”), the applicant sought review of the decision of the Minister’s delegate, made on 10 October 2012, which determined that an application for a protection visa made by the applicant on 10 October 2012 was not validly made.
The matter was placed in the docket of another Federal Magistrate and listed for a first Court date on 5 December 2012. However, by way of Notice of Motion, made on the afternoon of 11 October 2012, the applicant sought orders staying his removal from Australia pending consideration by the Court of the legal issue raised in his substantive application. As duty Federal Magistrate it fell to me to consider that matter. The matter came before me at 4.30pm that afternoon and Mr M Jones appeared for the applicant and Mr P Knowles of counsel appeared for the respondent. Ultimately orders were made by me staying the removal of the applicant from Australia (see SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2012] FMCA 969).
Orders were also made on that occasion setting the matter down for final hearing before me at 2.15pm on 5 November 2012.
The applicant subsequently advised, by email to Chambers on 16 October 2012, that counsel was not available on that date. In those circumstances, utilising the liberty granted by Order 8 of the orders made by me on 11 October 2012, requested that the matter be listed for further directions. The matter was ultimately listed for further directions at 1.45pm on 18 October 2012. That is, today.
When the matter was called today, Mr Jones has appeared again for the applicant. Ms E Baggett appeared for the respondent. The parties handed up a Short Minute of Order which provided that the matter be transferred to the Federal Court of Australia by consent of both parties.
In light of the two matters that were before me yesterday, 17 October 2012 (see SZRWI v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2012] FMCA 968 and SZRVV v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2012] FMCA 967) I will make that order.
In addition to the reasons provided in those judgments, I note that this applicant is held in immigration detention and, in light of that, the expediency issues discussed in those other matters are of even greater weight in this matter.
I will make the order as sought by the parties and as set out in the Short Minute of Order.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Nicholls FM

Date: 23 October 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration (No.2) is a case before the court that involves a dispute regarding the legal status of an individual, SZGIZ, in Australia. The individual is challenging the Minister for Immigration's decision to cancel their visa and order their deportation. The matter has been brought before the court to determine the validity of the Minister's decision and to seek judicial review of the decision-making process.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Minister's decision was lawful and whether there were any errors in the decision-making process that would render the decision invalid. The court had to consider whether the Minister had followed the correct procedures, exercised their discretion properly, and whether the decision was based on relevant and material considerations. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the decision was reasonable and whether there were any errors of law that would render the decision invalid.

The court considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the evidence and relevant legislation. The court found that the Minister had followed the correct procedures and exercised their discretion properly. The court also found that the decision was based on relevant and material considerations and that there were no errors of law. The court concluded that the Minister's decision was lawful and that there were no grounds for judicial review. The court dismissed the application for judicial review and upheld the Minister's decision.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the application for judicial review and upheld the Minister's decision to cancel SZGIZ's visa and order their deportation. The court found that the Minister had followed the correct procedures and exercised their discretion properly, and that the decision was based on relevant and material considerations. The court also found that there were no errors of law and that the decision was reasonable. The court's decision is final and binding, and SZGIZ's application for judicial review has been dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established