Rahul v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2025] FedCFamC2G 731
•27 March 2025
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Rahul v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FedCFamC2G 731
File number(s): MLG 1522 of 2019 Judgment of: JUDGE FORBES Date of judgment: 27 March 2025 Catchwords: MIGRATION – Student visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – matter listed for a final hearing – no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – application dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 65
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 13.06(1)(c)
Division: Division 2 General Federal Law Number of paragraphs: 15 Date of hearing: 27 March 2025 Place: Melbourne The Applicant: No appearance Counsel for the First Respondent: Ms K. Chan Solicitor for the First Respondent: Mills Oakley The Second Respondent: Submitting appearance, save as to costs ORDERS
MLG 1522 of 2019 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: RAHUL
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE FORBES
DATE OF ORDER:
27 MARCH 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application filed on 16 May 2019 is dismissed pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (Rules).
2.The Applicant pay the First Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $5,400.00.
AND THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A.The Applicant was called outside the courtroom at 10:27am today and there was no response to the call.
B.Pursuant to r 17.05 of the Rules, the Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order made in the absence of a party.
C.Written reasons for judgment to be published from Chambers at a later date.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(ex tempore revised from transcript)JUDGE FORBES
INTRODUCTION
This matter was listed for a final hearing before the Court in person at 10:15am on 27 March 2025. When the matter was called, there was no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant.
In the circumstances, the Court made the following orders:
1. The application filed on 16 May 2019 by is dismissed pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (Rules).
2. The Applicant pay the First Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $5,400.00.
The following notations were made to the orders:
A. The Applicant was called outside the courtroom at 10:27am today and there was no response to the call.
B. Pursuant to r 17.05 of the Rules, the Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order made in the absence of a party.
C. Written reasons for judgment to be published from Chambers at a later date.
These brief reasons explain why the Court dismissed the matter for non-appearance pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (Rules).
BACKGROUND
The matter before the Court today is an application for judicial review of a decision of the second respondent, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made on 29 April 2019. By that decision, the Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a Student Class TU, Subclass 500, visa under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
In an application for judicial review filed on 16 May 2019, the applicant alleges jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal and seeks relief from the court. The application filed by the applicant contains six grounds of review, but it is not presently necessary to set those out.
The hearing of the application for judicial review was listed to commence at 10.15am this morning. Prior to this matter being listed for final hearing, procedural orders were made which provided the applicant an opportunity to file an amended application and any affidavit or outline of submissions on which he intended to rely. No submissions have been provided to the court in accordance with those orders. However, the Minister, in accordance with those orders, has filed both a court book and an outline of written submissions - the submissions having been filed on 13 March 2025.
The time is now 10.34am. There is no appearance on behalf of the applicant. I asked my associate to call this matter in the corridors of the Court. My associate did so, and there was no response to that call.
The Minister seeks an order pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules2021 (Cth), for the application to be dismissed by reason of the applicant’s non-appearance.
Ms Chan of counsel, who appears on behalf of the Minister, seeks to rely on an affidavit of Anthony Robert Gardner, affirmed on 26 March 2025. In that affidavit, Mr Gardner deposes to a number of matters, including the applicant’s postal address and email address for service, and the fact that a sealed copy of the court book, filed on 28 January 2021, and correspondence accompanying that court book, was sent to the applicant’s email address for service that day.
Subsequently, a letter enclosing a copy of the court book was sent to the applicant’s postal address for service on 6 September 2022. More recently, on 13 March 2025, an email from the Minister’s solicitors attaching a sealed copy of the Minister’s submissions and a notice for hearing was sent to the applicant’s email address for service.
In addition to the matters deposed by Mr Gardner, I am also informed that the Court’s National Migration Team forwarded a copy of the notice of listing to the applicant’s email address on 30 January 2025. Subsequently, on 20 March 2025, my chambers informed the applicant of the date of this hearing, including that the hearing would be heard in person, and identified the specific courtroom in which the matter would be heard.
There is no appearance on behalf of the applicant notwithstanding the efforts made by the Minister and the Court to inform him of this hearing.
I am satisfied in all the circumstances, that the applicant was on notice, by way of emails sent to his nominated email address for service, as to the hearing.
Accordingly, I propose to make the order sought by Ms Chan. Namely, that the application be dismissed and the applicant pay the first respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $5,400.00.
I certify that the preceding fifteen (15) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore Reasons for Judgment of Judge Forbes. Associate:
Dated: 13 June 2025
0
0
2