Pradeep Kumar Ponugoti v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2015] HCASL 100

PRADEEP KUMAR PONUGOTI

v

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR

[2015] HCASL 100
M28/2015

1. The applicant is a citizen of India. On 15 March 2012, the applicant applied for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa. On 23 July 2012, a delegate of the first respondent refused to grant that visa on the basis that the applicant did not meet the requirement in relation to financial capacity as set out in cl 572.223(2)(b) of Sched 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

2. The applicant applied to the Migration Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") for review of the delegate's decision but did not appear at the scheduled hearing.  Despite some initial difficulty contacting the applicant before the hearing, the Tribunal considered that it had taken all steps available to it to afford the applicant the opportunity to appear and give evidence. 

3. On 17 October 2013, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to make a decision in the applicant's absence and affirmed the decision of the delegate.  The Tribunal noted that the issue was whether the applicant met the enrolment requirements for a student visa; it found that he did not.

4. On 28 August 2014, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Turner J) dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review.  Turner J held that none of the applicant's grounds of review identified an error in the decision of the Tribunal.

5. On 11 February 2015, the Federal Court of Australia (Barker J) dismissed the applicant's appeal.  Barker J held that the Tribunal was entitled to make a decision in the applicant's absence, that the decision was reasonably made, and that no error was disclosed in the reasons for decision of Turner J.

6. The applicant applies for special leave to appeal to this Court.  The applicant's draft notice of appeal and written case raise no question of law that would justify a grant of special leave to appeal.   The decision of Barker J is clearly correct.  An appeal to this Court would have no prospect of success.  Special leave is refused. 

7. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

S.M. Kiefel
18 June 2015 P.A. Keane