Applicant S 1083 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 295

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant S 1083 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 295

APPLICANT S1083 OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 143 of 2005

ALLSOP J
24 MARCH 2005
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 143 of 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT S 1083 of 2003 APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 MARCH 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for an extension of time in which to file an application for leave to appeal from the Orders of the Court made on 11 November 2004 be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs

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 143 of 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	APPLICANT S 1083 OF 2003 APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE:	24 MARCH 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I refer to my reasons for judgment in matter Applicant S 1510 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 294. This matter was dealt with by the learned primary judge in the same body of reasons as matter Applicant S1510. This applicant had sought consideration of his position under s 417 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the “Act”). The primary judge concluded that the application under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) before him was incompetent. The matters concerning Applicant S1083 are set out in the learned primary judge’s reasons. For the same reasons as the notice of appeal of Applicant S 1510 was incompetent and that any application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal or application for leave to appeal should be dismissed in matter Applicant S 1510 the same results should obtain in this application. The applicant here sought an application for extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal. That was dealt with by consent as an application to extend the time to file an application for leave to appeal. For the reasons that Applicant S1510’s application must fail, Applicant S1083’s application must fail. The Court has no jurisdiction to review decisions in connection with s 417 of the Act.

2. The applicant filed submissions as to the circumstances of difficulty in filing matters across the counter in this Court.  These submissions were put on by him pursuant to an order made by me that he file submissions in support of his appeal.  They are not submissions in support of his appeal.  However, I have read them and whether or not there was any difficulty in relation to filing documents across the counter those matters have played no part in my determination that the application should be dismissed.  I have come to that view as a matter of substance for the reasons set out in the reasons given in matter S 1510 of 2003. 

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop.

Associate:

Dated:             24 March 2005

The applicant appeared in person with the assistance of a Hindi interpreter.
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr A  Markus (Slr)
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	16 March 2005
Date of Judgment:	24 March 2005