Gill v Minister for Immigration

[2013] FCCA 2357

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GILL v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2013] FCCA 2357

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – no appearance by applicant – application dismissed.

Legislation:

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s.476.

Federal Circuit Rules 2001 (Cth) r.44.12.

Applicant: BILAL AHMED GILL

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 1398 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 27 September 2013

Date of Last Submission: 27 September 2013

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 27 September 2013

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Appearing for the Respondents: Ms A Carr

Solicitors for the Respondents: DLA Piper Australia

ORDERS

1. The name of the first respondent is amended to read “Minister for Immigration and Border Protection”.

2. The application made on 21 June 2013 is dismissed, pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

3. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs set in the amount of $3,000.00

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1398 of 2013

BILAL AHMED GILL

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex Tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. I have before me an application made on 21 June 2013 pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) seeking review of the decision made by the Migration Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) on 28 May 2013, which affirmed the decision of the Minister’s delegate to refuse a skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa to the applicant.

2. While the applicant appeared, by way of the grounds of his application to the Court would suggest that the applicant was confused as to the exact nature of the Tribunal’s decision. In any event, it is clear that the applicant sought to complain about the Tribunal decision, a copy of which was attached to his affidavit filed at the time of making his application to this Court. It is also clear that the applicant sought review of the decision of the Tribunal, that is set out in the bundle of relevant documents (the “Court Book” (“CB”) filed by the Minister in these proceedings (CB 183 to CB 186).

3. The applicant appeared in person at the first Court date in this matter on 17 July 2013. At that time orders were made for the conduct of this case before the Court.  The matter was set down for a “show cause” hearing pursuant to r. 44.12 the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”) today, 27 September 2013, at 2.15pm.

4. When the matter was called at 2.15pm, the applicant did not appear.  It is now well past 2.30pm and there is still no appearance by the applicant.

5. I take into account the first respondent’s Exhibit 1, (a letter dated 19 July 2013 from the solicitors for the first respondent notifying the applicant of the time, date and location of the hearing today) and the first respondent’s Exhibit 2 (a letter dated 24 September 2013 from the Court addressed to the solicitors for the first respondent and the applicant notifying them of the time, date and location of the hearing today). I am satisfied that the applicant had reasonable notice of the Court hearing today and of the location of that Court hearing.

6. It is appropriate that I make the order sought by the Minister dismissing the application for non-appearance pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Rules. The Minister also seeks his costs. There is nothing before me to argue against the making of a costs order in the usual way. The amount sought by the Minister is, in my view, reasonable in all the circumstances. I note that it is within the amount contemplated by the relevant Schedule to the Rules of this Court. I will make that order.

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date: 31 January 2014