CDQ17 v Minister for Immigration

[2019] FCCA 1241

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CDQ17 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2019] FCCA 1241

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Application to reinstate application to review of decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – no appearance by Applicant.

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr.13.03C(1)(c), 16.05

Applicant: CDQ17

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: IMMIGRATION ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY

File Number: SYG 1549 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Barnes

Hearing date: 3 May 2019

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 3 May 2019

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: No appearance

Solicitors for the Respondents: Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. There being no appearance by the Applicant, the application in a case filed on 14 March 2019 is dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

2. The Applicant pay the costs of the First Respondent fixed in the sum of $1,000.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1549 of 2017

CDQ17

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

IMMIGRATION ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Revised from Transcript)

1. This is an application for reinstatement of an application seeking judicial review of a decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority.  The original application for judicial review was filed in May 2017. 

2. Relevantly, the Applicant did not appear at a callover on 12 March 2019 and in his absence the matter was dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (the FCC Rules). He appeared later that day and subsequently filed a reinstatement application.

3. The notice of filing and hearing in relation to the reinstatement application filed on 14 March 2019, bears the date, time and place for a directions hearing which the Applicant attended on 20 March 2019. On that date he was given the opportunity to file an amended application and submissions. The orders I made that day also specified advised him of the date, time and place for the hearing of his application under r.16.05 of the FCC Rules. He did not file any subsequent documents.

4. The solicitors for the First Respondent relied on a letter sent to the Applicant on 23 April 2019 enclosing by way of service submissions and reminding the Applicant of the date, time and place of the hearing of his reinstatement application and informing him that if he did not attend they were instructed to seek to have the matter dismissed with costs. 

5. There was no appearance by the Applicant today at the time the matter was listed. Nor is there any appearance now, over 20 minutes later. In these circumstances the Minister seeks that the reinstatement application be dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the FCC Rules.

6. I am satisfied in all the circumstances that the Applicant was on sufficient notice of the hearing today, of the need to appear and of the possible consequences of non-appearance. It is appropriate to dismiss the application in a case pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c).

7. It is also appropriate that the Applicant should pay the costs of the First Respondent.  The amount sought is appropriate and reasonable in light of the nature of this and similar matters. 

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Barnes

Associate: 

Date:  13 May 2019