NAQU v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

[2006] FCA 1424

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAQU v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1424

NAQU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 889 OF 2006

MOORE J
2 NOVEMBER 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 889 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

NAQU
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:	2 NOVEMBER 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant's notice of motion filed 26 October 2006 be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the first respondent'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	NSD 889 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

NAQU
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE:	2 NOVEMBER 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application to set aside orders made on 5 October 2006 dismissing with costs an application which purported to be an appeal against a judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 4 April 2006. The application was dismissed pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The Federal Magistrate dismissed as incompetent an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal handed down 3 April 2003. The Federal Magistrate dismissed the application as incompetent because it had not been filed within the prescribed time.

2. In my opinion, the Federal Magistrate was correct in reaching that conclusion.  Were the orders of 5 October 2006 to be set aside, the resultant proceedings are doomed to fail.  It is for that reason, rather than the reasons advanced by the applicant as to why he did not attend on 5 October 2006, that appears to dictate that I dismiss the application to set aside the orders of 5 October 2006.  I dismiss the application and order the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.

Associate:

Dated:       6 November 2006

The Applicant appeared in person
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz
Date of Hearing:	2 November 2006
Date of Judgment:	2 November 2006