Gurung v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2018] FCA 1728

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Gurung v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1728

Appeal from:	Application for an extension of time: Gurung v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Federal Circuit Court of Australia, No. 892/2018, Orders dated 11 May 2018)
File number(s):	NSD 892 of 2018
Judge(s):	FARRELL J
Date of judgment:	9 November 2018
Legislation:	Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 35.33
Date of hearing:	9 November 2018
Registry:	New South Wales
Division:	General Division
National Practice Area:	Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category:	No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	4
Counsel for the Applicants:	The Applicants did not appear
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Ms E Warner Knight of Australian Government Solicitor
Counsel for the Second Respondent:	The Second Respondent submitted save as to costs

ORDERS

NSD 892 of 2018

BETWEEN:

MANJU KUMARI GURUNG

First Applicant

BISHNU GURUNG

Second Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE:	FARRELL J
DATE OF ORDER:	9 NOVEMBER 2018

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for an extension of time is dismissed pursuant to r 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).

2.The applicants must pay the first respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application. 

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

FARRELL J

1. This is an application for an extension of time.  The matter was set down for hearing at 2:15 pm on Friday, 9 November 2018. That was confirmed to the applicants by the Australian Government Solicitor by letter dated 2 November 2018 addressed to an address in Footscray, Victoria 3011 which is referred to on documents filed by the applicants.

2. The applicants did not appear at 2:15 pm. The matter was called three times. It is now 2:40 pm and the applicants have still made no appearance. The Minister’s representative has applied for an order under r 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) that the application be dismissed.

3. I note that non-appearance has been a common feature of the applicants’ dealings with the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.  They did not appear in relation to an application for an extension of time to review a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal made six years after that decision was made.  The application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicants were not present when it was called on for hearing.  Subsequently, the applicants made an application for reinstatement of the application for extension of time but they also did not appear at the time that matter was called on for hearing.

4. In the circumstances, it is appropriate to make the order that the Minister has sought dismissing this application.  I order that the applicants pay the first respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Farrell.

Associate

Dated:        14 November 2018