MZAAV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2015] FCA 469

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MZAAV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 469

Citation:	MZAAV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 469
Appeal from:	MZAAV v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2014] FCCA 2805
Parties:	MZAAV v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File number:	VID 2 of 2015
Judge:	MIDDLETON J
Date of judgment:	8 May 2015
Legislation:	Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
Date of hearing:	8 May 2015
Place:	Melbourne
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	6
Counsel for the Appellant:	The Appellant did not appear
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Mr D Brown, Australian Government Solicitor

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	VID 2 of 2015

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

MZAAV
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MIDDLETON J
DATE OF ORDER:	8 MAY 2015
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed.

2.The Appellant pay the First Respondent’s costs.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	VID 2 of 2015

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

MZAAV
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MIDDLETON J
DATE:	8 MAY 2015
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. An appeal is brought from a judgment and orders of the Federal Circuit Court, made on 19 December 2014, dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the second respondent dated 28 January 2014.  The Tribunal affirmed an earlier decision of a delegate of the first respondent not to grant the appellant a Protection (Class XA) visa.

2. This appeal was called on for hearing and there was no appearance by the appellant.  I am satisfied that the appellant was well aware that the appeal would be called on for hearing this morning before me, as stated in the Daily List.  My chambers, on two occasions yesterday, telephoned the appellant and left a message, the latest one to the effect that the appeal was listed for hearing today at 10.15 am and the appeal would continue as listed. 

3. A facsimile message was communicated to the Registrar of the Court and has been brought to my attention. The facsimile contains a note signed in the name of the appellant, which states that the appellant is unable to attend the hearing today due to an illness. The facsimile also contains a signed medical certificate from Dr Sonia Bhullar of Epping Clinic, which only states:

   This is to certify that I have today examined [the appellant]
   In my opinion, [the appellant] is unfit for … normal work from 7/5/2015 to 09/05/2015 inclusive.

4. I regard the communication made by the appellant as an application for an adjournment, but in my view that application should be rejected.  The medical certificate and the signed note do not provide an adequate reason for the appellant's absence from Court today.  I do not know the nature of the illness and, in any event, all that is stated is that the appellant is unfit for normal work.  It does not state that there would be any difficulty, by reason of the appellant's illness, for the appellant to attend today's hearing.

5. In these circumstances, it is appropriate, pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), that the appeal be dismissed. I propose to order that the appeal be dismissed. I should indicate that, as this is an order made in the absence of the appellant, the appellant can seek to reinstate the appeal upon the filing and serving of appropriate material.

6. Therefore, I order that the appeal be dismissed and the appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal. 

I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Middleton.

Associate: 

Dated:       15 May 2015