SZECD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 1006

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZECD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1006

SZECD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs
NSD 821 of 2005

EDMONDS J
SYDNEY
16 JUNE 2005

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD821 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZECD APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	EDMONDS J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 JUNE 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal be granted.

2.The notice of appeal filed with the present application stand as the notice of appeal unless amended by the applicant pursuant to Order 52 r 21.

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	NSD821 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

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

JUDGE:	EDMONDS J
DATE:	16 JUNE 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT GIVEN EXTEMPORE
(REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT)

1. This is an application for an extension of time to file an appeal against a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court delivered on 29 April 2005.  The applicant filed the present application on 26 May 2005.  The length of the delay is very short, some 5 or 6 days.  Moreover, the applicant says that he was legally represented below but has not since been legally represented.  Any prejudice the Minister would suffer by reason of the delay is not significant.

2. The applicant has filed a draft notice of appeal which is not particularised but which provides arguable grounds of appeal.  The application was made within 8 days of the decision of the High Court in SAAP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2005) 215 ALR 162 and I am conscious that if the applicant is not allowed to appeal there may be matters which have been raised in that decision which he will not have the opportunity to agitate.

3. I will therefore grant the application for an extension of time.  In the circumstances I will order that the draft notice of appeal which the applicant has filed stand as the notice of appeal unless amended by the applicant pursuant to Order 52 rule 21.  I explained to the applicant that he should endeavour to obtain legal advice in relation to the draft notice with a view to providing proper particulars of the grounds.  There will be no order as to costs.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Edmonds.

Associate:

Dated:             1 August 2005

The applicant appeared in person

Solicitor for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz
Date of Hearing:	16 June 2005
Date of Judgment:	16 June 2005