SINGH v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 2202

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SINGH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 2202

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – no appearance by the applicant – application dismissed.

Legislation:

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr.13.03C, 44.12

Applicant: ARSHDEEP SINGH

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 1064 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 13 August 2014

Date of Last Submission: 13 August 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 13 August 2014

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Appearing for the Respondents: Mr M Wiese

Solicitors for the Respondents: Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. The application made on 17 April 2014 is dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs set in the amount of $3,000.00.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1064 of 2014

ARSHDEEP SINGH

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. I have before me today an application made pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) on 17 April 2014 seeking review of the decision of the Migration Review Tribunal made on 2 April 2014 affirming the decision of the Minister’s delegate to refuse a skilled residence (class VB) visa to the applicant.

2. The applicant attended at the first Court date in this matter in person on 30 April 2014. On that day a number of orders were made for the conduct of the applicant’s case before the Court. At that time the matter was set down for mention at a callover today before me at 9.30 am.

3. It is now nearly 55 minutes past that time. The applicant has not appeared.

4. The Minister, in these circumstances, has applied for the substantive application to be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the FCC Rules”).

5. The Minister sought leave to inspect the Court file. I granted leave for that purpose. The Minister has tendered in evidence a letter sent from the Court, advising of the date, location and time of today’s Court event, to the applicant’s address for service (Respondent’s Exhibit 1 (“RE1”)). I am satisfied, having regard to RE1, and to the Court’s record of the first Court date where the applicant appeared in person and the Court event today was scheduled, that the applicant has had reasonable notice of the Court event today.

6. I am also satisfied that the applicant was on notice that if he did not take up the opportunity to file any further material in support of his application, that the Minister would seek an immediate show cause hearing pursuant to r.44.12 of the FCC Rules and press for dismissal of his application today. In that sense, the applicant was on notice of the importance of attending today.

7. I am not aware of any communication from the applicant to the Registry of the Court seeking an adjournment in this matter. In the circumstances, his absence is unexplained.

8. In all the circumstances I am satisfied that the Minister’s application for dismissal in the absence of the applicant should be granted. I will make the order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date:  25 September 2014