SZCBX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 307

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZCBX v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 307

SZCBX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 195 OF 2005

GYLES J
9 MARCH 2005
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 195 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	SZCBX APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE OF ORDER:	9 MARCH 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

2.The applicant is to pay the costs of the respondent.

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 195 OF 2005

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

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE:	9 MARCH 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This matter purports to be commenced by way of notice of appeal to this Court from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court.  The form is inappropriate for that purpose but that does not particularly matter.  What does matter is that the appeal is from an interlocutory order dismissing the proceeding for failure to comply with a procedural order.  That being the case, the appropriate application is for leave to appeal, not simply to appeal.  More importantly again, however, is the fact that the applicant does not appear this morning.

2. When the matter was originally called there was no appearance so I stood the matter down in the list.  Half an hour more has elapsed, the matter has been called again and the applicant does not appear.  Under the circumstances I have no alternative but to dismiss the proceeding and I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs.  That is the order of the Court.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Gyles.

Associate:

Dated:            29 March 2005

Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz
Date of Hearing:	9 March 2005
Date of Judgment:	9 March 2005