SZJAW v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2007] FCA 976

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZJAW v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 976

SZJAW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND ANOR

NSD205 OF 2007

EMMETT J
7 MAY 2007
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD205 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

SZJAW
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	7 MAY 2007
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The name of the First Respondent be changed to Minister for Immigration and Citizenship.

2.The Application be dismissed.

3.The Applicant pay the Minister’s costs of the Application.

4.Orders 2 and 3 be stayed up to and including 1 June 2007.

5.The matter be listed for Directions on 1 June 2007 at 9:30 am.

6.The First Respondent notify the Applicant as soon as practicable, in writing, the orders as made today.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD205 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

SZJAW
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE:

7 MAY 2007

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for extension of time within which to file a notice of appeal from orders of the Federal Magistrates Court.  By those orders, the Federal Magistrates Court ordered that an application for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal be dismissed.  The matter was fixed for hearing before me on Friday, 4 May 2007.  When the matter was called on for hearing, the applicant appeared in person with the assistance of an interpreter.  He requested the Court’s leave to be represented by a Mr Solaiman, who has no right to practise but who informed the Court that he was a law student.  The Minister’s solicitor did not oppose Mr Solaiman being heard and I, in effect, granted him leave to appear as a McKenzie Friend. 

2. In the course of the hearing, it became apparent that Mr Solaiman was not prepared.  Therefore, I stood the matter down to give him some time to consult with the applicant.  When the matter was called on again, the applicant was not present, having left the Law Courts Building, apparently to obtain some documents.  Accordingly, I stood the matter down again until the end of the day.  At that stage, Mr Solaiman was again struggling and I suggested that, notwithstanding that it was inconvenient to the Minister’s solicitor, the matter be stood over to today and that, in the meantime, Mr Solaiman could formulate any further grounds of appeal on which the applicant wished to rely. 

3. When the matter was called on again, shortly after 2.15 pm today there was no appearance from the applicant.  The Minister, therefore, asks that the proceeding be dismissed.  Before dealing with that application, however, I propose to say something briefly about the claims made by the…