FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Ho v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1176
WING CHEONG HO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 414 OF 2000
HELY J
24 JULY 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 414 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
WING CHEONG HO
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:
24 JULY 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c).
2.The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.
3.The respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 414 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
WING CHEONG HO
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
HELY J
DATE:
24 JULY 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This matter was listed for directions on 11 May 2000 before a registrar. On that occasion, Mr Ho appeared in person and his signature appears upon some short minutes of order, which include an order that the matter be listed for hearing before me at 10.15 am this morning. Directions were given that the applicant should file and serve written submissions five working days prior to the hearing date, but no such submissions have been filed or served. In accordance with the direction, the respondent lodged written submissions with the Court, and by a letter dated 19 July 2000, forwarded a copy of those submissions to the applicant at his address for service. The letter referred to the fact that the matter was fixed for hearing this morning before me.
Mr Ho has not appeared. I note that he also did not appear at the hearing nominated by the Refugee Review Tribunal. Mr Lloyd, who appears for the Minister, seeks an order under Order 32, rule 2(1)(c) that the proceedings should be dismissed having regard to the absence of the applicant. I think that he is entitled to an order to the effect.
I dismiss the proceedings pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c). I order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs in these proceedings and I direct that the respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely. Associate:
Dated: 22 August 2000
No appearance by the applicant Counsel for the Respondent: Mr S Lloyd Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 24 July 2000 Date of Judgment: 24 July 2000
- AGLC
- Ho v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1176
- Case
- [2000] FCA 1176
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue that the court had to address was whether the Minister's decision was lawful and if the applicant's rights were properly considered. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the Minister's decision was made in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions and if the decision-making process complied with the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. Additionally, the court had to examine if the decision was based on relevant and sufficient evidence.
The court found that the Minister's decision was indeed lawful and properly made. It was determined that the Minister had correctly applied the relevant legislative provisions in making the decision and that the decision-making process adhered to the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The court also held that the decision was based on relevant and sufficient evidence. Consequently, the court dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review and ordered that the proceedings be dismissed. Furthermore, the applicant was directed to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings, and the respondent was instructed to serve a copy of the order on the applicant by posting it to his address for service.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c).
2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.
3. The respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: HELY J
Full text does not contain this section.