Ho v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2018] FCA 133

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ho v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 133

Appeal from:	Application for leave to appeal: Ho v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2017] FCCA 1750
File number:	NSD 1328 of 2017
Judge:	BROMBERG  J
Date of judgment:	16 February 2018
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – dismissal of application for leave to appeal for non-appearance
Legislation:	Federal Court Rules2011 (Cth), r 35.33
Cases cited:	Ho v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2017] FCCA 1750
Date of hearing:	16 February 2018
Registry:	New South Wales
Division:	General Division
National Practice Area:	Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category:	Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	4
Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Ms N Johnson of Mills Oakley
Counsel for the Second Respondent:	The Second Respondent filed a submitting appearance, save as to costs

ORDERS

NSD 1328 of 2017

BETWEEN:

KA YING HO

Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE:	BROMBERG  J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 FEBRUARY 2018

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant’s application for leave to appeal dated 4 August 2017 is dismissed.

2.The first respondent’s costs of the application be paid by the applicant.

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BROMBERG J:

1. The Court has before it an application for leave to appeal.  The applicant seeks leave to appeal from a decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, published as Ho v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2017] FCCA 1750. As far as the Court is aware, the applicant is not legally represented.

2. The applicant’s application was listed for hearing commencing at 2.15pm this afternoon.  The applicant was not present at Court at that time, and some efforts were made to contact the applicant on the mobile number available to the first respondent.  Those efforts were unsuccessful. 

3. I am satisfied that the applicant has been made aware of the hearing date for the appeal, both by the Court and by correspondence from the first respondent. Rule 35.33of the Federal Court Rules2011 (Cth) provides that in an application such as this, if a party is absent when the application is called on for hearing, the Court has the capacity to dismiss the application. In the circumstances as I have described them, an order dismissing the application is appropriate.

4. Accordingly, I will make an order dismissing the application for leave to appeal. 

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

Associate:        

Dated:        21 February 2018