SZJED v Minister for Immigration

[2007] FMCA 1309

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZJED v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2007] FMCA 1309

MIGRATION – Application to review decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – non-appearance by Applicant.

Federal Magistrates Court Rules r.13.03A(c)

Applicant: SZJED

Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File number: SYG 2169 of 2006

Judgment of: Barnes FM

Hearing date: 30 July 2007

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 30 July 2007

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr T Reilly

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. There being no appearance by the Applicant the application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

2. The applicant shall pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $4,000.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 2169 of 2006

SZJED

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal affirming a decision of the delegate of the first respondent not to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The applicant sought review of the Tribunal decision by application filed in this Court on 8 August 2006.  He filed an amended application on 10 October 2006.  It is apparent from the file that the applicant attended a directions hearing on 7 September 2006 and agreed to consent orders which included an order listing the matter for hearing today at 2:15pm.

2. The applicant did not file written submissions.  The first respondent did.  The solicitors for the first respondent wrote to the applicant on 19 July 2007 enclosing a copy of the respondent’s submissions and reminding him of the date, time and place at which the matter was listed, indicating that if he did not attend the respondent would seek that the matter be dismissed and that he pay the Minister’s legal costs of the proceedings. 

3. The applicant was not present when the matter was listed for hearing. Nor is he present now, some 20 minutes later. In those circumstances, it is appropriate, as is sought by the first respondent, that the application be dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

4. The first respondent seeks costs in the sum of $4,000.  I consider that the amount is appropriate in light of the nature of this and other similar matters. 

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

Associate: 

Date:  10 August 2007