FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZBDU v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 715
MIGRATION – failure to appear - adjournment
SZBDU and SZBDZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 282 of 2005JACOBSON J
1 JUNE 2005SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 282 of 2005
On Appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court
BETWEEN:
SZBDU
FIRST APPELLANTSZBDV
SECOND APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
JACOBSON J
DATE OF ORDER:
1 JUNE 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The matter be adjourned and listed for hearing on Friday 10 June 2005 at 9.30am.
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 282 of 2005
On Appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court
BETWEEN:
SZBDU
FIRST APPELLANTSZBDV
SECOND APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
JACOBSON J
DATE:
1 JUNE 2005
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
This matter was listed for hearing before me today at 10.15 am.
Last night I received a facsimile from the appellant attaching a medical certificate from Dr Dimitri Tcherkas of the North Strathfield Medical Centre.
On its face the certificate does suggest possible grounds for an adjournment of the hearing. However, the certificate is not verified, and the Minister is not in a position to test whether in fact what is said to be a damaged left knee and consequent pain is in fact so severe as to prevent the appellant from attending before me this morning on the hearing.
Nevertheless, it does seem to me to be appropriate in the circumstances to grant an adjournment; although I do so somewhat reluctantly.
The certificate states that the appellant will be unable and unfit for court attendance until 7 June 2005. I propose to adjourn the matter for hearing before me at 9.30 am on 10 June 2005.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jacobson. Associate:
Dated: 1 June 2005
No Appearance for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R Bromwich Solicitor for the Respondent: Clayton Utz Date of Hearing: 1 June 2005 Date of Judgment: 1 June 2005
- AGLC
- SZBDU v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 715
- Case
- [2005] FCA 715
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined whether the Minister's decision-making process complied with the statutory requirements and whether the applicant had the requisite procedural fairness. The applicant argued that they had not been provided with adequate notice of the allegations or the opportunity to respond adequately, which potentially rendered the decisions unlawful. The court had to assess the sufficiency of the procedural fairness afforded to the applicant in light of the evidence and submissions presented.
In its judgment, the court determined that the Minister's decisions were indeed lawful and adhered to the procedural fairness requirements. The court found that the applicant had been given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations and evidence, and that the decision-making process complied with the statutory provisions. Consequently, the court dismissed the applicant's challenge, upholding the Minister's decisions. The matter was subsequently adjourned and listed for hearing on a future date to allow for further proceedings if necessary.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The matter be adjourned and listed for hearing on Friday 10 June 2005 at 9.30am.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: JACOBSON J
Full text does not contain this section.