Buf15 v Minister for Immigration

[2017] FCCA 1406

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BUF15 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2017] FCCA 1406

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: BUF15

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2435 of 2015

Judgment of: Judge Emmett

Hearing date: 22 June 2017

Date of Last Submission: 22 June 2017

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 22 June 2017

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant

Solicitors for the Respondents: Mr Thomas Liu
Clayton Utz

FEDERAL CIRCUIT
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 2435 of 2015

BUF15

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The first respondent seeks an order pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”) that the proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 4 September 2015, be dismissed by reason of the failure of the applicant to appear at today’s scheduled hearing.

2. The applicant appeared before me on 28 April 2017 at a scheduled final hearing of this matter. On that occasion, the applicant informed the Court that he had contacted one or two barristers who were too busy to give him advice at that time.

3. The applicant requested an adjournment to meet with a barrister with whom he had made contact and whom he identified. The first respondent opposed that adjournment. Ultimately, it was granted to the applicant as the Court was satisfied that he did have an appointment with a barrister the afternoon of the hearing. The matter was subsequently set down by me for hearing today at 10:15am.

4. The Orders made by me on 28 April 2017 note the appointment that the applicant had with the legal representative. Those Orders also note that the applicant was provided in Court with another copy of the Court Book and a copy of the first respondent’s submissions filed on 21 April 2017 so that he would have those documents to take to his appointment that afternoon.

5. There has been no document filed by or on behalf of the applicant since then.

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

7. The matter was set down for hearing today at 10:15am. It is now 10:30am. The matter has been called outside the courtroom on at least two occasions, the most recently being less than five minutes ago.

8. The location of the courtroom today is the same as the location of the courtroom on the last occasion. A copy of the Orders made by me on 28 April 2017 was given to the applicant in Court on that date.

9. I also note that Order 14 of the Orders made by the Registrar on 15 October 2015 stated that, in the event there was no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant at the time of any scheduled Court event, the applicant’s application may be dismissed without further notice.

10. In the circumstance, I am satisfied that the applicant is aware of today’s scheduled hearing and, for whatever reason, has chosen not to attend.

11. I am satisfied that the orders sought by the first respondent are appropriate.

12. Accordingly, the proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 4 September 2015, pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Rules by reason of the failure of the applicant to appear at today’s scheduled hearing, should be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding twelve (12) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Emmett

Date: 29 June 2017