SZGYH v Minister for Immigration and Anor (No.2)

[2006] FMCA 794

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZGYH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR (No.2) [2006] FMCA 794

MIGRATION – Visa– protection visa – Refugee Review Tribunal – application for review of decision by Refugee Review Tribunal to affirm delegate’s decision not to grant a protection (class XA) visa.

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Notice of motion – where applicant sought to set aside the orders previously made to dismiss his application for non-appearance – where applicant did not attend court.

Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 r.13.03A

SZGYH v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 694

Applicant: SZGYH

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2154 of 2005

Judgment of: Scarlett FM

Hearing date: 24 May 2006

Date of Last Submission: 24 May 2006

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 24 May 2006

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No appearance

Solicitors for the Applicant: The Applicant was not represented.

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr Cramer

Solicitors for the Respondent: Blake Dawson Waldron

ORDERS

1. The Application is dismissed due to the non-appearance by the Applicant.

2. The Applicant is to pay the First Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $300.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 2154 OF 2005

SZGYH

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. This is a Notice of Motion by the Applicant in the substantive proceedings moving the Court for orders setting the orders made on 4^th of this month dismissing the substantive application for want of appearance by the Applicant. The Applicant seeks a new final hearing date.

Background

1. The Applicant sought judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 12^th July 2005 affirming a decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant him a protection visa. The application was listed for Final Hearing before me on 4^th May 2006 at 10:15am When the Applicant did not appear, I stood the matter down in the list in order to make inquiries as to why there was any reason for his lateness or non-arrival. The First Respondent’s solicitor telephoned him with the aid of an interpreter and informed the Court that he had said that his migration agent had said that his application was listed for Final Hearing at 2:20pm that afternoon.

2. I was not satisfied with this explanation and was not prepared to leave the matter in the list until 2:20pm that afternoon, as there was another matter to be heard and an interpreter in the Mandarin language had not been booked for the afternoon. I dismissed the application on the basis of the Applicant’s non-appearance under the provisions of Rule 13.03A and made an order for costs in favour of the First Respondent (SZGYH v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 694).

Notice of motion

1. The Applicant filed his Notice of Motion on 4^th May 2006, accompanied by an affidavit. It was listed for 10:15am today. The Applicant has not attended court again. He is not legally represented.

   
   

   I propose to dismiss his application to set aside the orders of 4^th May 2006 with costs on the basis of his non-appearance. 

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Scarlett FM

Associate:  Virginia Lee

Date:  2 June 2006