NAHL of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural& Indigenous Affairs

[2003] FCA 278

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAHL of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 278

NAHL OF 2002 V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N1133 OF 2002

JACOBSON J
20 MARCH 2003
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N1133 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	NAHL OF 2002 APELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	JACOBSON
DATE OF ORDER:	20 MARCH 2003
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        Matter adjourned until 9 April 2003 at 2.15 pm.

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	N1133 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	NAHL OF 2002 APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	JACOBSON
DATE:	20 MARCH 2003
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This appeal was listed before me for hearing today.  It appears that despite efforts made by the solicitors for the respondent to provide counsel's written submissions to the appellant, the appellant did not receive the submissions until this morning.

2. The Court directed that the respondent's written submissions be filed and served by 13 March 2003.  This would have allowed the appellant one week within which to consider the written submissions. 

3. Mr Lloyd of counsel submits that there is nothing in the written submissions which would take the appellant by surprise.  I consider there is some force in Mr Lloyd's submission, nevertheless it seems to me that in order to preserve the opportunity given to the appellant by the direction which I made last year, he ought to have some time within which to consider the written submissions. 

4. Initially the appellant made his application for an adjournment on the ground that he wanted to discuss Mr Lloyd's written submissions with his solicitor, however in sworn evidence, given in the witness-box, the appellant indicated that he wished to consult his migration agent who is apparently not a qualified solicitor.

5. It does appear from documents in the form of submissions handed to me this morning that the appellant has had assistance from somebody with legal knowledge, even if that person is not qualified.

6. In those circumstances I think that I ought to give the appellant some time to consider the written submissions before the matter is again before the Court for hearing. 

7. Other matters were put to me by the appellant in support of the adjournment application but I do not consider that they justify the grant of an adjournment.

8. Nevertheless, for the reasons that I've stated I propose to adjourn the matter for a short period.  I therefore propose to list this matter for hearing on Wednesday, 9 April at 2.15pm.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jacobson.

Associate:

Dated:            31 March 2003

Appellant appeared in person.
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr S Lloyd
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Blake Dawson Waldron
Date of Hearing:	20 March 2003
Date of Judgment:	20 March 2003