SZFOM v Minister for Immigration

Case

[2006] FMCA 1083

17 July 2006


FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZFOM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2006] FMCA 1083
MIGRATION – Application for adjournment.
Applicant: SZFOM
First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File Number: SYG200 of 2005
Judgment of: Raphael FM
Hearing date: 17 July 2006
Date of Last Submission: 17 July 2006
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 17 July 2006

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant: In person
Solicitors for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitors

ORDERS

  1. Application for adjournment declined.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG200 of 2005

SZFOM

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The applicant in these proceedings has sought an adjournment.  He filed an affidavit with the court in support of that application on 4 July 2006.  The affidavit indicated that the applicant was not trained in the law and not able to represent himself.  He had sought some legal advice.  He had obtained from the court a list of practitioners specialising in migration law but he had not been able to interview any of these because he had not received his papers from his migration agent who, he told me, was overseas.

  2. Mr Markus, on behalf of the Minister, objects to any adjournment of this case.  He points out that the proceedings were commenced on 24 January 2005 and that the applicant has had over 18 months in which to secure legal advice.  He reminds me that the applicant received the benefit of advice under the Minister's scheme, possibly 12 months ago and argues that if the applicant was really sincere about the need for legal advice he would have obtained it previously.

  3. I have considered what the applicant has to say and weighed it against the inconvenience, both to the court and to the Minister, of adjourning these proceedings.  The applicant has not instilled in me any confidence that legal advice will be speedily obtained or that this advice might lead to a successful application.  In all the circumstances, I am not prepared to grant the adjournment and must ask the applicant to proceed on the basis that he shall run his case himself.

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

Associate: 

Date: 

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0