NBMA v Minister for Immigration
[2006] FMCA 708
•1 May 2006
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| NBMA v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2006] FMCA 708 |
| MIGRATION – Review of decision by Refugee Review Tribunal – applicant failed to appear – application dismissed pursuant to r.13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001. |
| Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.477(1) |
| Applicant: | NBMA |
| First Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
| Second Respondent: | REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File number: | SYG3012 of 2005 |
| Judgment of: | Emmett FM |
| Hearing date: | 1 May 2006 |
| Date of last submission: | 1 May 2006 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 1 May 2006 |
REPRESENTATION
| No appearance by the Applicant |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr T. Reilly |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Ms J. Bautista, Sparke Helmore |
ORDERS
Pursuant to r. 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 the application before this Court is dismissed.
That the Applicant pay the First Respondent's costs in the amount of $4000.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG3012 of 2005
| NBMA |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
First Respondent
| REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
I note it is now 10.36am and there has been no appearance by the applicant and no contact has been received by the applicant from either the Court, my chambers or the first respondent or the first respondent's legal advisers.
The first respondent relies on a letter dated 21 April 2006 from the first respondent's solicitors addressed to the applicant at both her postal address and residential address as identified on the amended application filed in this Court on 28 September 2005.
I note that those addresses are the same as those addresses identified on the application filed in this Court on 26 July 2005.
RECORDED : NOT TRANSCRIBED
Further I note that no submissions or further evidence have been filed by or on behalf of the applicant, despite the directions made by consent by the Registrar of this Court on 10 August 2005. However, I do note that an amended application was filed by the applicant in accordance with those directions.
The application is in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal) handed down on 5 August 2003. A notice of objection to competency was filed by the first respondent on 10 August 2005 having regard to the time elapsed between the handing down of a decision and the filing in this Court of review of the Tribunal's decision. That time being in the order of two years and well outside the 28 days provided for under s.477(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”).
RECORDED : NOT TRANSCRIBED
In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the order sought by the first respondent is appropriate.
ORDERS DELIVERED
The first respondent seeks costs fixed in the amount of $4000. I note that schedule 1 of the costs of Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 provides in the circumstances for costs in excess of that sum. In the circumstances I am satisfied that it was appropriate both that counsel be briefed and that the costs sought are reasonable.
I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Emmett FM
Deputy Associate: A D’Addona
Date: 17 May 2006
0
0
1