Najw v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2003] FCA 296

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAJW v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 296

NAJW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 158 of 2003

ALLSOP J
1 APRIL 2003
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 158 of 2003

BETWEEN:	NAJW APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDE  R:	1 APRIL 2003
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application be dismissed under Order 10 rule 3(2), and under Order 30 rule 5(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the proceedings.

3.The respondent notify the applicant by certified mail, to the address for service in the application, of the orders made above and of the terms of Order 35 rule 7(2)(a).

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 158 of 2003

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

JUDGE:	ALLSOP J
DATE:	1 APRIL 2003
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter an application is made under Order 10 rule 3(2) and Order 35 rule 5(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.  The respondent moves orally for the dismissal of the application.

2. The history of this matter is set out in an affidavit of Andrew Aung Htun Zaw, a graduate-at-law employed by the solicitors for the respondent.  The application was filed on 25 February 2003, seeking review of an order of the Refugee Review Tribunal (The Tribunal).  The application had a return date of 13 March 2003.  The applicant gave as an address for service Unit 4/38 Latty Street, Fairfield, New South Wales 2165, and a notice of appearance was filed on behalf of the respondent on 6 March 2003.

3. On 13 March 2003, at 2.15, the matter was called before a Registrar of the Court and there was no appearance by the applicant.  The matter was adjourned to 20 March 2003.  On 20 March, again there was no appearance by the applicant and the Registrar of the Court stood the matter over to my list at 9.30 am on 27 March 2003.  That date was later changed to 1 April 2003, which is today.

4. I do not propose to identify exhaustively the evidence, but the affidavit read in support of the application, makes it clear that the solicitors for the respondent, on each occasion, sent by registered post to the address for service, all relevant correspondence, informing the applicant of the days and times at which this matter would be before the Court.  A number of those letters have been returned to the respondent marked “return to sender”.  The applicant has revealed absolutely no interest in the application filed on the applicant's behalf or by the applicant and I am satisfied that grounds have been made out under either Order 10 or Order 30 for the dismissal of the application.

5. The orders I make are as follows:

   1. The application be dismissed under Order 10 rule 3(2), and under Order 30 rule 5(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

   2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the proceedings.

   3.The respondent notify the applicant by certified mail, to the address for service in the application, of the orders made above and of the terms of Order 35 rule 7(2)(a).

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop J.

Associate:

Dated:            7 April 2003

No appearance by the Applicant
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz
Date of Hearing:	1 April 2003
Date of Judgment:	1 April 2003