FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZBUY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1639
MIGRATION – no point of principle
SZBUY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 1848 OF 2005MOORE J
3 NOVEMBER 2005
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 1848 OF 2005
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZBUY
APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
3 NOVEMBER 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal be dismissed.
2.The appellant pay the respondent's costs.
3.Costs be fixed in the sum of $650.
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 1848 OF 2005
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZBUY
APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE:
3 NOVEMBER 2005
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is an appeal from a judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 12 September 2005. The notice of appeal was filed on 30 September 2005. A return date for directions was noted in the notice of appeal at 11 am on 2 November 2005. In the meantime, according to records of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, which I accept for present purposes is an accurate record of the entry and departure of the appellant from Australia, the appellant left Australia on 28 October 2005 at 2.10 pm.
The appellant did not appear at 11 am on 2 November 2005 at a directions hearing before a Registrar for the reasons just explained. In those circumstances, the appellant has failed to attend a hearing relating to the appeal and I have power under s 25 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to order that the appeal is to be dismissed. I propose to exercise that power. My doing so will be conditional upon the respondent to the appeal filing and serving an affidavit verifying that the appellant failed to appear on 2 November 2005 before a Registrar.
I further order that the costs of the appeal be fixed in the sum of $650.
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: 16 November 2005
The Appellant did not appear. Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore Date of Hearing: 3 November 2005 Date of Judgment: 3 November 2005
- AGLC
- SZBUY v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1639
- Case
- [2005] FCA 1639
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court needed to resolve included whether the Minister had exercised his discretion in a manner that was consistent with the applicable legislation, and whether there were procedural errors in the decision-making process. The court was required to determine if the Minister had appropriately considered all relevant factors, including the appellant's personal circumstances, and if the decision was rational and based on proper legal principles.
In delivering its judgment, the court found that the Minister had correctly exercised his discretion and that the decision was not flawed. The court reasoned that the Minister had considered all relevant information and that the decision-making process was in line with the statutory requirements. The court was satisfied that the Minister's decision was rational and that there were no procedural errors. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs, which were fixed at $650.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal be dismissed.
2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs.
3. Costs be fixed in the sum of $650.
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: MOORE J
Full text does not contain this section.