Applicant M1030/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2004] FCA 1117

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant M1030/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1117

APPLICANT M1030/2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

V813 of 2003

WEINBERG J
25 AUGUST 2004
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V813 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT M1030/2003 APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	WEINBERG J
DATE OF ORDER:	25 AUGUST 2004
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The application be dismissed with costs.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V813 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT M1030/2003 APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	WEINBERG J
DATE:	25 AUGUST 2004
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

EXTEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This matter was listed for hearing at 10.15 this morning.  When the matter was called on, there was no appearance on the part of the applicant.  Dr Donaghue, appearing for the Minister, applied for an order under Order 32 Rule 2(1)(c) of the Federal Court Rules seeking to have the application dismissed on the basis that the applicant was absent when the matter was called on for hearing.  I adjourned the matter for thirty minutes to see whether the applicant would appear, however, he has not done so.  Dr Donaghue has renewed his application for an order dismissing the application, having regard to the failure of the applicant to prosecute his claim, and for costs.  I am satisfied that that is an appropriate order to make in the circumstances, and I propose to make that order.

2. I should indicate that I have also had the opportunity to read the submissions filed on behalf of the applicant at a time when he was legally represented, and also the submissions filed on behalf of the Minister.  If I considered that there was any merit in the applicant's claim, I would have taken a different course and adjourned the case in order to enable the applicant to be located.  However, I consider that the Minister's comprehensive submission adequately answer the matters raised on behalf of the applicant, and that is a further factor inclining me towards the order that I have made dismissing the application, in effect, for want of prosecution.

3. Accordingly, the order of the Court that the application be dismissed with costs. 

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

Associate:

Dated:             25 August 2004

No appearance for the applicant
Counsel for the Respondent:	Dr S P Donaghue
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	25 August 2004
Date of Judgment:	25 August 2004