Singh v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2002] FCA 1182

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Singh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1182

JASPAL SINGH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 762 of 2002

SACKVILLE J
SYDNEY
12 SEPTEMBER 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	762 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	JASPAL SINGH APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	SACKVILLE J
DATE OF ORDER:	12 SEPTEMBER 2002
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	762 OF 2002

BETWEEN:	JASPAL SINGH APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	SACKVILLE J
DATE:	12 SEPTEMBER 2002
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These are proceedings instituted by an application filed on 26 July 2002.  The applicant in the proceedings challenges a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal (“MRT”) made on 28 June 2002.  In that decision the MRT affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent (“the Minister”) that the applicant was not entitled to the grant of an Extended Eligibility (temporary) (class TK) visa.  The first directions hearing was scheduled for 23 August 2002.  On that occasion there was no appearance by the applicant.  The proceedings were stood over until today. 

2. When the matter was called today there was again no appearance on behalf of the applicant.  Mr Chami, who appears for the Minister, has moved pursuant to Federal Court Rules O 10 r 3(2) for dismissal of the proceedings on the ground of the non-appearance of the applicant.  In support of this application Mr Chami has read an affidavit.  That affidavit establishes that correspondence was sent to the applicant at his address for service as notified on the application filed in this Court.  That correspondence alerted the applicant to the fact that the Minister intended to ask the Court to dismiss the application with costs should there be no appearance.

3. The affidavit evidence makes it clear that the applicant no longer resides at the address given on the application filed in this court.  Nonetheless that is the address for service.  I accept that the Minister has done all that can reasonably be expected to notify the applicant both of the date on which this directions hearing was to be held and of the Minister's intention to apply to dismiss the proceedings should the applicant not appear.

4. In these circumstances the appropriate course is to dismiss the application.  I further order the applicant to pay the Minister's costs.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Sackville.

Associate:

Dated:            12 September 2002

The applicant did not appear.

Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr Z Chami appeared on behalf of the Minister
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz
Date of Hearing:	12 September 2002
Date of Judgment:	12 September 2002