FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicants S1560 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2003] FCA 1619

APPLICANTS S1560 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N1413 OF 2003

EMMETT J

4 DECEMBER 2003

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. leave be granted to file a notice of discontinuance in the form now filed;

2. the proceeding be dismissed;

3. the adult applicants pay the first respondent’s costs of the proceeding.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1                     The applicants are citizens of South Africa, who arrived in Australia on 4 March 1994. On 25 July 1994, they applied under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) for refugee status and related entry permits. The applications were deemed to be applications for protection visas as from 1 September 1994. On 10 April 1997, a delegate of the second respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (‘the Minister’), refused to grant protection visas to the applicants. On 7 May 1997, the applicants applied to the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) for review of the delegate’s decision. On 26 February 1998, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant protection visas.

2                     On 29 May 2003, a proceeding was commenced in the High Court of Australia on behalf of the applicants, including their children. That matter was remitted to this Court. On 27 October 2003, I directed the applicants to file and serve, no later than 24 November 2003, a statement of contentions of relevant facts and law and any affidavits upon which the applicants intended to rely at the hearing. No documents have been filed pursuant to that direction.

3                     When the matter was called on for hearing today, the solicitor for the applicants filed a notice of discontinuance on behalf of the female applicant and the children and indicated that he did not have instructions on behalf of the husband applicant. The Minister asks that the proceeding be otherwise dismissed for failing to comply with the directions and that the adult applicants be ordered to pay the Minister’s costs.

4                     The claim before the Tribunal was made on behalf of the family unit, the principal claimant being the female claimant, who said that she was being pursued because the law firm for which she worked dealt with the African National Congress (‘ANC’). She says she was being pursued by an individual who was a member of the Inkatha Freedom Party who opposed the ANC. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant was being targeted as an individual and was not satisfied that the applicant had a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of membership of a particular social group. There was no separate claim by the husband to an entitlement to protection under the Refugees Convention.

5                     In the circumstances, I consider that it is appropriate to accede to the Minister’s application. Accordingly, I propose to order that the proceeding be dismissed and that the adult applicants pay the Minister’s costs of the proceeding.

Associate:

Dated: 22 January 2004