SZAZT v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

[2004] FCA 1698

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZAZT v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2004] FCA 1698

SZAZT v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 1749 OF 2004

MOORE J
9 DECEMBER 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 1749 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZAZT APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:	9 DECEMBER 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.  The appeal be dismissed.

2.  The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.

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	NSD 1749 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZAZT APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE:	9 DECEMBER 2004
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I will make an order dismissing the appeal with costs.  I do so because the appellant has not appeared.  The court now has power to dismiss an appeal in those circumstances exercisable by a single judge.

2. I am fortified in adopting this approach because the notice of appeal does not, in terms, appear to raise any issue of substance and, in any event, takes a form that appears to be a pro forma notice of appeal that I have seen in a number of cases in the recent past.

3. Accordingly, I order the appeal be dismissed and the appellant pay the respondent's costs.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.

Associate:

Dated:             20 December 2004

The Appellant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	9 December 2004
Date of Judgment:	20 December 2004