KUMAR v Minister for Immigration

Case

[2010] FMCA 263

8 April 2010


FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KUMAR v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2010] FMCA 263
MIGRATION – No appearance.
Migration Act 1958, s.116(1)(b)
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001
Applicant: SANDEEP KUMAR
First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
Second Respondent:  MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File Number: SYG 57 of 2010
Judgment of: Raphael FM
Hearing date: 8 April 2010
Date of Last Submission: 8 April 2010
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 8 April 2010

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant: In person
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr T Reilly
Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

  1. Application dismissed pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.

  2. Applicant to pay the First Respondent’s costs assessed in the sum of $5,000.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 57 of 2010

SANDEEP KUMAR

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. In this matter there is an application for review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal which decided on 2 December 2009 to affirm a decision to revoke the applicant’s Subclass 573 Higher Education Sector visa under s.116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (the “Act”). The applicant was not present at 10.15a.m. when the matter was due to be heard nor was he present when his name was called outside the court at 10.30am. The court is aware that the applicant is himself aware of this hearing because yesterday he was telephoned by the court to inquire as to whether he now needed an interpreter as a result of the withdrawal of his lawyer who filed notice of this on 18 March 2010. The applicant responded advising the court that he did not require an interpreter.

  2. In the circumstances I propose to dismiss the matter for non appearance pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.  I order that the applicant pay the first respondent’s costs which I assess in the sum of $5,000.00.

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Associate: 

Date:  15 April 2010

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

2