SZIQZ v Minister for Immigration

[2006] FMCA 744

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZIQZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2006] FMCA 744

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 a Tribunal hearing – where applicant did not attend court.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s.39B
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.474
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 r.10.01

Applicant: SZIQZ

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File No: SYG 1077 of 2006

Delivered on: 22 May 2006

Delivered at: Sydney

Hearing date: 22 May 2006

Judgment of: Scarlett FM

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. The Application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 10.01 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.

2. The Applicant is to pay the First Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $1,000.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 1077 of 2006

SZIQZ

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. This is an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal affirming a decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant the Applicant a protection visa. The decision was handed down on

   
   

   16^th March 2006.

Background

1. The Applicant is a citizen of Malaysia who applied for a protection (Class XA) visa on 24^th November 2005. The application was refused on 21^st December 2005.

Refugee Review Tribunal review

1. The Applicant applied to the Refugee Review Tribunal for a review of that decision on 13^th January 2006. The Tribunal wrote to him about aspects of his claim and, after correspondence relating to an extension of time, the Tribunal informed him that it would hand down its decision on 16^th March 2006.

Application to the court

1. The Applicant filed an Application under Migration Act accompanied by an affidavit on 10^th April 2006. The application was listed for its First Court Date in this court at 10:00am on 22^nd May 2006. The Applicant did not appear when called. The case was called again at 10:55am and the Applicant still did not appear. No message has been received at the court explaining the Applicant’s absence.

2. At 10:58am, on the application of the solicitor for the First Respondent, I agreed to dismiss the application under the provisions of Rule 10.01 for want of appearance by the Applicant at court.

3. In such a circumstance, I consider it appropriate to make an order for costs in favour of the First Respondent, who seeks costs in the sum of $1,000.00.

4. I order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Scarlett FM

Associate:  Virginia Lee

Date:  23 May 2006