SZFMN v Minister for Immigration
[2006] FMCA 440
•13 March 2006
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZFMN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION | [2006] FMCA 440 |
| MIGRATION – Visa – protection visa – Refugee Review Tribunal – application for review of decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal affirming a decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant a protection visa to the applicant – where applicant did not attend Tribunal hearing. |
| Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s.39B Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss.426A,474 |
| SAAP v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCA 24 |
| Applicant: | SZFMN |
| Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGNEOUS AFFAIRS |
| File Number: | SYG 123 of 2005 |
| Judgment of: | Scarlett FM |
| Hearing date: | 13 March 2006 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 13 March 2006 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 13 March 2006 |
REPRESENTATION
| The Applicant: | No appearance |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Blake Dawson Waldron |
ORDERS
The application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03A due to the non-appearance by the Applicant at Court.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent Minister’s costs fixed in the sum of $3,500.00.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 123 of 2005
| SZFMN |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGNEOUS AFFAIRS |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Application
This is an application for review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal. The applicant attended Court on 8th February 2005 but has not attended today. I know of no reason why the applicant has not appeared. There seems to be no point in leaving the matter any further.
I propose to dismiss the matter for non-appearance by the applicant and vacate the hearing date.
I also propose to make an order for costs in favour of the respondent Minister. The amount of $3,500.00 is sought and that seems to be an appropriate order in respect to a case that has been prepared for hearing in all respects except the briefing of counsel and the filing of an outline of submissions.
I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Scarlett FM
Associate: S.Polley
Date: 27 March 2006
0
0
2