SZBXL v Minister for Immigration

[2004] FMCA 1083

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZBXL v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION [2004] FMCA 1083

MIGRATION – Application by respondent Minister to have substantive proceedings dismissed for non-compliance with court orders.

Applicant: SZBXL

Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

File No: SYG 2474 of 2003

Delivered on: 5 November 2004

Delivered at: Sydney

Hearing date: 5 November 2004

Judgment of: Raphael FM

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Christopher Levingston & Associates

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. Application dismissed pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03(2)(b) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

2. The applicant to pay the respondent's costs assessed in the sum of $900 pursuant to Part 21 Rule 21.02(2)(a) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 2474 of 2004

SZBXL

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 17 November 2003, the applicant filed an application for an order for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on

   
   24 September 2003

   and handed down on 21 October 2003. The grounds of the application were that:

   a)The decision involved an important exercise of the power conferred by the Migration Act and Regulations

   b)Procedures that were required by the Migration Regulations to be observed in connection with the making of the decision were not observed;

   c)There was no evidence or other material to justify the making of the decision.

2. The applicant did not attend the hearing before the Tribunal that came to the conclusion that in the absence of an ability to question the applicant about her claims, it could not be satisfied the she had a genuine subjective fear or a well founded objective fear of persecution for a Convention reason. On 7 April 2004, this matter was given a directions hearing in the course of which the court ordered by consent that the applicant file and serve an amended and fully particularised application together with an affidavit in support and any evidence upon which he proposes to rely on or before 28 June 2004. That did not occur.

3. It would appear that the applicant received advice from the Minister's Advice Scheme at some time in May or June 2004. The applicant has not by today filed an amended application or provided any particulars on the grounds upon which she relies. She appeared today and was assisted by Mr Prince on a pro bono basis but no indication has been given to the court of any real grounds that might found an order for review. In those circumstances I believe it is in the best interests of the applicant and of the administration of justice that this application be dismissed pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03(2)(b) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules. I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs which I assess in the sum of $900.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Associate: 

Date:  23 February 2005