SZCAX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 586

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZCAX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 586

SZCAX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 525 OF 2005

MADGWICK J
27 APRIL 2005
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 525 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	SZCAX APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	MADGWICK J
DATE OF ORDER:	27 APRIL 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applications for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal and for time to file an application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2.        The applicant pay the costs of the respondent, assessed in the sum of $800.

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	N 525 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	SZCAX APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	MADGWICK J
DATE:	27 APRIL 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

MADGWICK J:

1. This is an application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal and for time to file an application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court. Judgment was given on 23 February 2005 by Federal Magistrate Raphael. The applicant had failed to appear at a directions hearing on 18 January 2005 and orders were made by the Registrar dismissing the application pursuant to rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.

2. The applicant sought, in effect, a review of the Registrar’s decision.  He claimed that his failure to attend the Registrar’s hearing in question arose from an inability to read and write English.  He said that he was consequently confused about the date.  However, the learned Federal Magistrate noted that, under cross-examination, the applicant indicated that he had had the assistance of an appropriate interpreter at the previous directions hearing when the occasion of the missed directions hearing was clearly indicated, and when a copy of the orders made fixing the subject directions hearing date was given to him. 

3. The learned Federal Magistrate was satisfied that the applicant was well aware of the hearing date of 18 January 2005 and that his non-attendance was not due to any fault of the Court processes.  In any case, his Honour took the view that, because there was no apparent jurisdictional error in the Refugee Review Tribunal’s (‘the Tribunal’) reasoning, which was sought to be challenged in the proceedings in the Federal Magistrates Court, there would be no utility in allowing the applicant an opportunity to put his case before the Court.

4. It seems to me that the applicant’s application must fail.  In the first place, although the extent to which he is out of time is not especially long, there is no credible explanation at all given for the delay.  Further, there appears to me to be no arguable case at all that the learned Federal Magistrate was wrong, so that it would be quite futile to permit the applicant leave to appeal in any event.

5. Accordingly, the applications, will be dismissed with costs, which I assess in the sum of $800.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick.

Associate:

Dated:            12 May 2005

Solicitor for the Applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	27 April 2005
Date of Judgment:	27 April 2005