Saha v Minister for Immigration

[2017] FCCA 292

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SAHA v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2017] FCCA 292

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Notice of Discontinuance filed – costs ordered in favour of the First Respondent.

Applicant: DEBASHIS SAHA

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 477 of 2016

Judgment of: Judge Dowdy

Hearing date: 16 February 2017

Date of Last Submission: 16 February 2017

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 16 February 2017

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant appeared in person.

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr T Galvin

Solicitors for the Respondents: Minter Ellison

THE ORDERS OF THE COURT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Applicant is to pay the First Respondent’s costs of the proceeding in the sum of $4,200.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 477 of 2016

DEBASHIS SAHA

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(REVISED FROM TRANSCRIPT)

1. In this proceeding the Applicant filed an Application on 3 March 2016 seeking judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 8 February 2016 refusing to grant to him a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa. The Application was given a return date of 1 April 2016 when procedural orders were made and the matter was set down for final hearing today.

2. On 2 February 2017, the Applicant attended the Registry to file a Notice of Discontinuance. That intention was conveyed to my Chambers but the Applicant needed leave to file his Notice of Discontinuance. The Minister’s lawyers were contacted for their views in that regard, which were ultimately to the effect that they did not seek to impose any terms on the Notice of Discontinuance but wanted $4200 for costs, being below scale costs.

3. The Applicant not unreasonably wanted time to consider that requested amount for costs and whether or not he should agree to such costs.  And he did that overnight, and on 3 March, he indicated that he wanted to continue to file his Notice of Discontinuance but that the matter should be before the Court for argument in relation to costs. And that is why I am in Court today with Mr Galvin, who appears for the Minister, and the Applicant himself.

4. I should note that on 3 February 2017 I granted leave in Chambers for the filing of the Notice of Discontinuance and that filing was effected. It transpires today that the Applicant was not so much concerned with the quantum of the costs that the Minister sought but wanted some sort of possibility for arrangements for him to be able to pay the costs off by instalments.

5. So I adjourned for some 10 minutes to allow discussions to take place between the Applicant and the Minister’s representative, Mr Galvin.  And that has now occurred.

6. I order the Applicant to pay the First Respondent’s costs in the sum of $4,200.

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Dowdy

Associate: 

Date:       21 February 2017