CLL17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
[2019] FCA 2000
•19 November 2019
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
CLL17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 2000
Appeal from: Application for extension of time and leave to appeal: CLL17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 1242 File number: NSD 819 of 2019 Judge: MARKOVIC J Date of judgment: 19 November 2019 Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 35.33(1)(a)(i) Date of hearing: 19 November 2019 Registry: New South Wales Division: General Division National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Category: No Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 8 Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant did not appear Solicitor for the First Respondent: Ms A Wong of Mills Oakley Counsel for the Second Respondent: The Second Respondent filed a submitting notice save as to costs ORDERS
NSD 819 of 2019 BETWEEN: CLL17
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, MIGRANT SERVICES AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First RespondentADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
MARKOVIC J
DATE OF ORDER:
19 NOVEMBER 2019
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to r 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) the application for an extension of time and leave to appeal filed on 24 May 2019 (Application) be dismissed.
2.The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs of the Application as agreed or taxed.
3.The name of the first respondent be changed to Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(REVISED FROM TRANSCRIPT)MARKOVIC J:
This is an application for an extension of time and leave to appeal from orders made by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissing an application in a case in which the applicant sought an order reinstating an application for judicial review of a decision of the second respondent.
The application was filed by the applicant on 24 May 2019, together with an accompanying affidavit. The application was subsequently set down for hearing by the Court before me on 19 November 2019 at 10.15 am.
On 17 June 2019 orders were made by a Registrar of this Court requiring, among other things, that the applicant take certain steps, including filing and serving a written outline of submissions upon which he seeks to rely (June Orders). No submissions have been filed in accordance with the June Orders. The June Orders also invited the applicant to file and serve a draft notice of appeal setting out particularised grounds of appeal within 10 business days of their date. Similarly, as is apparent from the court file, no such particularised grounds of appeal were filed.
On 12 November 2019, the solicitors for the first respondent served a copy of their client’s submissions on the applicant under cover of a letter in which they noted that the matter was listed for hearing today at 10.15 am before me and provided the address of the Court building. In the letter the first respondent’s solicitors further noted:
Please note that you are required to attend the scheduled hearing and if there is no appearance, the first respondent may without further notice seek orders that your application be dismissed with costs.
When the application was called on for hearing this morning at 10.15 am there was no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant. The matter was called three times outside the courtroom and there remained no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant.
At the request of the first respondent’s solicitors, I adjourned the hearing of the application for 10 minutes until 10.30 am to allow the applicant further time to appear. When the hearing resumed at 10.32 am there was still no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant.
In those circumstances the first respondent seeks an order that the application be dismissed pursuant to r 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). Given that the applicant has clearly been notified of the hearing date and of the application that the first respondent would make if he failed to appear, I will accede to that application and make the order sought. The first respondent also seeks an order that the applicant pay his costs as agreed or taxed. That order should also be made.
Finally, the first respondent seeks an order that his name be amended. I will also make an order to that effect.
I certify that the preceding eight (8) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Markovic. Associate:
Dated: 26 November 2019
0
0
1