Karki v Minister for Immigration
[2011] FMCA 883
•2 November 2011
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| KARKI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2011] FMCA 883 |
| MIGRATION – No appearance. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 |
| Applicant: | RAJENDRA KARKI |
| First Respondent: Second Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File Number: | SYG 1408 of 2011 |
| Judgment of: | Raphael FM |
| Hearing date: | 2 November 2011 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 2 November 2011 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 2 November 2011 |
REPRESENTATION
| For the Applicant: | No appearance |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Sparke Helmore |
ORDERS
Application dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.
Applicant to pay the First Respondent’s costs assessed in the sum of $3,600.00.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 1408 of 2011
| RAJENDRA KARKI |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
First Respondent
| MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The applicant in this matter filed an application on 4 July 2011 seeking a review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal. He did not attend a directions hearing that was held on 21 July 2011 personally, but he later contacted the solicitors for the respondent and agreed to a hearing date and time which was provided to him by the respondent’s solicitors in a letter dated 21 July 2011, sent to him at the address which he had given on his application.
On 24 October 2011 the solicitors wrote again to Mr Karki providing him with a copy of their client’s submissions and reminding him of the hearing today at 2.15p.m. Mr Karki was not present in court at 2.15p.m nor was he present when his name was called outside the court at 2.30p.m. In the circumstances, I propose to dismiss the matter for non-appearance pursuant to Part 13, Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules 2001 and order that Mr Karki pay the first respondent’s costs which I assess in the sum of $3,600.00.
I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM
Date: 14 November 2011
0
0
1