Afp21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (No 2)

In *Afp21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (No 2)*, Kendall J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an application for judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming the refusal of a Protection visa. The applicant, a citizen of Malaysia, sought to have his substantive hearing adjourned and his matter transferred from the Perth registry to the Adelaide registry of the Court. This followed an earlier unsuccessful attempt by the applicant to transfer the proceedings from Perth to Melbourne.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant an adjournment of the substantive hearing and whether to order the transfer of the proceedings to a different registry. In determining the adjournment request, the Court was required to consider factors such as the evidence supporting the request, the parties' conduct in the litigation, potential prejudice to the respondent, and modern case management principles, including the avoidance of undue delay and wastage of public resources. For the transfer request, the Court had to have regard to the convenience of the parties, the limiting of expense and cost, whether the matter had been listed for final hearing, and any other relevant matters, guided by the principle of conducting the case most suitably in the interests of all parties and the efficient administration of the Court.

Kendall J reasoned that an adjournment was warranted to ensure a just resolution, noting the applicant's unrepresented status and his stated need to find legal assistance and prepare for complex protection claims. The Court found that the applicant's reasons, while not detailed in writing, indicated a genuine need for more time. Regarding the transfer request, the Court determined that it was not in the interests of all parties for the matter to remain listed in the Perth registry, applying the principles outlined in section 52 of the *Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999* (Cth) and Rule 8.01 of the Rules, as well as the guidance from *National Mutual Holdings Pty Ltd v Sentry Corp*. The Court ordered that the hearing be adjourned to 1 November 2021, granted the applicant leave to appear via Microsoft Teams from Adelaide, but dismissed the application for transfer to the Adelaide registry. Consequently, the application in a case was otherwise dismissed.