SZBIM v Minister for Immigration
[2005] FMCA 499
•14 April 2005
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZBIM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION | [2005] FMCA 499 |
| MIGRATION – Review of decision of RRT - Where the solicitor for the applicant had withdrawn – where it was implied that the applicant was aware of the date of the hearing – where the applicant did not attend. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Act 1999 |
| Applicant: | SZBIM |
| Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
| File Number: | SYG 1739 of 2003 |
| Judgment of: | Raphael FM |
| Hearing date: | 14 April 2005 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 1 April 2005 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 14 April 2005 |
REPRESENTATION
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Ms R Pepper Ms C Gray |
ORDERS
The Application is dismissed pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules
The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs assessed in the sum of $4000, pursuant to Part 21 Rule 21.02(2)(a) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 1739 of 2003
| SZBIM |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In these proceedings the applicant was, until recently, represented by a solicitor. However, on or about 22 March 2005, his solicitor served upon him a notice of withdrawing as a lawyer. I note that the address to which the lawyer wrote was the same address to which the respondent wrote in two letters that have been handed up to me dated
1 and 8 April 2005. The address there given is not the address on the court papers to the extent that there is such an address, it being only in an application for fee exemption. That address is the address in Shepparton Victoria, to which the Tribunal's decision was sent. However, I am prepared to imply that the applicant's lawyer knew his last known address and, therefore, it would seem that the provisions of Part 9 Rule 9.03(5) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules would apply. That rule states:
(5) If a party's lawyer withdraws from the record, the party's last known residential or business address is the address for service until:
(a) the party appoints another lawyer, or
(b)the party files a notice of address for service.
In any event, the applicant was informed of the date of the hearing via his solicitors, and they represented him at the directions hearing. I am entitled to imply that he was aware of the date of the hearing, and the date to which that hearing was moved, namely today, on the basis that the court sent a letter advising of the changed hearing date to those solicitors some five months before they ceased to act on the applicant's behalf.
In the circumstances, the applicant not having attended the court by 2.45pm on the day of the hearing, I propose to dismiss the application pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules, and I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs by assessing the sum of $4000, pursuant to Part 21 Rule 21.02(2)(a) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules.
I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM
Associate:
Date:
0
0
1