NAFX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2003] FCA 122

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAFX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2003] FCA 122

MIGRATION – application for a protection visa – judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal – no appearance by the applicant.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 39B

Migration Act 1958 (Cth)

NAFX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 1348 OF 2002

HILL J
14 FEBRUARY 2003

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1348 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	NAFX APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	HILL J
DATE OF ORDER:	14 FEBRUARY 2003
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent Minister’s costs.

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 1348 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	NAFX APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	HILL J
DATE:	14 FEBRUARY 2003
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application brought by the applicant against the respondent Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Indigenous Affairs under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), as made applicable by the provisions of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal refusing to grant to her a protection (class XA) visa and accordingly, affirming the decision of the respondent Minister. The matter was originally before the court on 3 February 2003 when there was no appearance on behalf of the applicant.

2. On that day I directed the respondent Minister to advise the applicant that she had in essence two alternatives; the first was to accept the orders in the draft short minutes of order, which the Minister forwarded to her; the second alternative was to attend today when I would consider making alternative orders.  I also requested the Minister to advise her that if neither these courses were adopted, I would consider making orders having the application dismissed.

3. I have received a copy of a letter addressed to the applicant dated 4 February 2003, in compliance with those orders. I will mark the copy of the letter ‘A’ in these proceedings.  There is no appearance again today and accordingly, I would order that the application be dismissed and that the applicant pay the Minister's costs of it.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hill.

Associate:

Dated:            27 February 2003

Counsel for the Applicant:	No appearance for the applicant.
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	14 February 2003
Date of Judgment:	14 February 2003