Singh v Minister for Immigration

[2013] FCCA 820

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SINGH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2013] FCCA 820

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Judicial review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – applicant fails to attend – proceedings dismissed pursuant to Federal Circuit Court Rule 13.03C(1)(c) – no matter of principle.

Legislation:  
Migration Act 1958 (Cth)

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C(1)

Applicant: GURVEER SINGH

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: ADG 290 of 2012

Judgment of: Judge Simpson

Hearing date: 17 June 2013

Date of Last Submission: 17 June 2013

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 17 June 2013 (ex tempore)

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: No appearance

Counsel for the Respondents: Ms Johnson

Solicitors for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitors

ORDERS

1. The application of 22 November 2012 be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay forthwith the first respondent’s cost in the sum of FOUR THOUSAND AND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($4,800.00).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT ADELAIDE

ADG 290 of 2012

GURVEER    SINGH

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(ex tempore)

1. I have before me an application brought by Mr Gurveer Singh filed on 22 November 2012, in which he seeks a judicial review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal dated 17 October 2012.  The applicant’s name has been called three times, but he does not appear.  Counsel for the first respondent has provided me with a letter of 5 June 2013 that was sent to the applicant, in which the first respondent, by its solicitors, states:

   “We refer to the above matter and enclose by way of service a copy of the first respondent’s submissions.  This matter is listed for hearing on 17 June 2013 at 2.15 pm before Judge Simpson at the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Roma Mitchell Commonwealth Law Courts building, 3 Angas Street, Adelaide, SA 5000.  You are required to attend court on this occasion.  If you do not attend on this occasion, the respondent will seek orders from the court that your matter be dismissed and that you pay the Minister’s costs of the proceedings.  If you have any queries, please contact us.”

2. Contact details for solicitors for the second respondent were provided at the bottom of the letter. 

3. I am informed by counsel for the first respondent that no contact has been made by the applicant.  It may be that the applicant read the first respondent’s submissions and realised that the application was unlikely to succeed and, therefore, simply has not attended today. 

4. I am asked to make an order dismissing the proceedings, pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c). That rule, under the heading of Default of Appearance of a Party, relevantly provides as follows:

   “(1)If a party to a proceeding is absent from a hearing (including a first court date) the court may do one or more of the following.”

   (a)  …

   (b)  …

   (c)  …if the absent party is an applicant, dismiss the application.”

5. In the circumstances, I consider it appropriate to dismiss the proceedings.  The first respondent is entitled to its costs.  I fix the costs in the sum of $4,800.

6. I make the orders to be found at the beginning of these reasons.

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

Associate: 

Date:  15 July 2013