Ast17 v Minister for Immigration

[2019] FCCA 1601

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AST17 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2019] FCCA 1601

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant at scheduled hearing – application dismissed pursuant to rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C

Applicant: AST17

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 512 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Emmett

Hearing date: 6 June 2019

Date of Last Submission: 6 June 2019

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 6 June 2019

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant

Solicitors for the Respondents: Mr Anthony Gardner
(Minter Ellison)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 512 of 2017

AST17

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The first respondent seeks an order that the proceeding before this Court commenced by way of application, filed on 22 February 2017, be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules2001 (Cth) by reason of the failure of the applicant to attend today's scheduled hearing.

2. In support, the first respondent's solicitor Mr Gardener read the affidavit of Jennifer Louise Strugnell affirmed 3 June 2019. That affidavit annexes screenshots from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection's computer based Integrated Client Services Environment. 

3. Based on that evidence, I am satisfied that the applicant's bridging visa ceased on 19 October 2017 and that the applicant departed Australia on that date.

4. The applicant attended a directions hearing before a Registrar of this Court on 8 June 2017. On that occasion, the applicant was given leave to file an Amended Application, any further evidence and submissions in support of his application. I note that the applicant was also provided with the contact details of legal services providers and translating and interpreting services in documents headed in the applicant's own language at that directions hearing. On that occasion, the matter was set down for final hearing today at 10:15am before me. No documents have been filed by the applicant either in accordance with those directions or otherwise.

5. On 4 June 2019, today’s scheduled hearing time was relisted for 9:30am this morning rather than 10:15am. The applicant was notified of the Orders made on 4 June 2019 at the email address provided by the applicant on his initiating application filed on 22 February 2017.

6. The time is now 10:11am. The matter has been called on at least two occasions outside the courtroom.

7. There has been no communication received from the applicant either by the first respondent's solicitor or the Court seeking an adjournment of today's hearing or for any other reason.

8. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the applicant is aware of today's hearing and has departed Australia, thereby choosing not to attend the hearing.

9. Accordingly, the orders sought by the first respondent are appropriate, and the proceeding commenced by way of application filed on 22 February 2017 should be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding nine (9) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Emmett

Deputy Associate: 

Date:  13 June 2019