SZFWO v Minister for Immigration

[2006] FMCA 1188

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZFWO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION [2006] FMCA 1188

MIGRATION – Review of RRT decision − no appearance by applicant.

Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 Part 13.03A(c)

Applicant: SZFWO

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

File Number: SYG 619 of 2005

Judgment of: Raphael FM

Hearing date: 10 August 2006

Date of Last Submission: 10 August 2006

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 10 August 2006

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by applicant

Solicitors for the Respondent: Mr D. Sim
Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. Application dismissed according to Part 13 Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Courts Rules 2001.

2. Applicant to pay the respondent’s costs assessed in the sum of $2,500.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 619 of 2005

SZFWO

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter the applicant, who did not appear before the Refugee Review Tribunal, filed an application for review of a decision of the Tribunal on 11 March 2005.  She instructed a firm of solicitors to appear on her behalf at the directions hearing which took place on 23 March 2005.  On 11 April 2005 those solicitors wrote to the Federal Court advising that the content of the short minutes of order which had set this matter down for hearing on 18 August 2006 had been conveyed to the applicant.  The letter unfortunately also stated that the matter had been listed for final hearing on 21 July 2005.  After that date several letters were sent to the applicant by the court in relation to payment of outstanding setting down fees, and on 7 and 14 February 2006 a letter was sent advising the applicant of a change of date from 18 August 2006 until today.  All these letters were returned marked ‘insufficient address’.  The address used was the address given by the applicant on her application.  One of the letters was marked ‘return to sender, no longer at this address’, and I am prepared to infer that the applicant is no longer there. However, the applicant has a responsibility to advise the court of her whereabouts so that she can be informed of any changes to her hearing or other matters in relation to her case. 

2. The proceeding was called on at 10.15. The applicant was not in attendance. I returned to the bench at 10.30. The applicant was still not here. Her name was called outside the court and she has not appeared at 10.37. In the circumstances I dismiss these proceedings pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03A(c) Federal Magistrates Court Rules. I order that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs which I assess in the sum of $2,500.

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM.

Associate: 

Date: