FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZFBW v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1372

SZFBW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

NSD 797 OF 2005

EDMONDS J

20 SEPTEMBER 2005

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 797 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT

BETWEEN:	SZFBW APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	EDMONDS J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 SEPTEMBER 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be dismissed.

2. The appellant pay the respondent’s costs, fixed in the sum of $2,000.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 797 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT

BETWEEN:

SZFBW

APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	EDMONDS J
DATE:	20 SEPTEMBER 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT GIVEN EX TEMPORE

(REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT)

Edmonds J:

1 In this matter, the appeal must be dismissed. The appellant’s amended notice of appeal is not grounded in any error of law other than that to be inferred from ground 3: that the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) failed to take into account all relevant considerations. On my review of the decision of the Tribunal, that ground cannot be sustained. Clearly, the Tribunal did take into account all the material which the appellant put before it. The inability of the Tribunal to be satisfied as to the veracity of that material does not provide any ground for judicial review. Moreover, there is no obligation on the Tribunal to inquire further as to information which might corroborate that which has been put before it or otherwise to support the appellant’s case.

2 I agree with the Federal Magistrate that no jurisdictional error is disclosed by the Tribunal’s decision. The appeal will be dismissed with costs.

3 The respondent asks that I make a fixed costs order. I will order that the appellant pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $2,000.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Edmonds.

Associate:

Dated: 28 September 2005

Solicitor for the Appellant:	The appellant appeared in person

Solicitor for the Respondent:	Blake Dawson Waldron

Date of Hearing:	20 September 2005

Date of Judgment:	20 September 2005

Top