SZLJZ v Minister for Immigration
[2008] FMCA 395
•6 March 2008
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZLJZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2008] FMCA 395 |
| MIGRATION – Persecution – review of Refugee Review Tribunal decision – visa – protection visa – refusal. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, r.13.03A |
| Applicant: | SZLJZ |
| First Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
| Second Respondent: | REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File number: | SYG 2994 of 2007 |
| Judgment of: | Cameron FM |
| Hearing date: | 6 March 2008 |
| Date of last submission: | 6 March 2008 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 6 March 2008 |
REPRESENTATION
| No appearance by the Applicant |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Ms K. Morgan |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Australian Government Solicitor |
ORDERS
Pursuant to r.13.03A(c) of the Rules of Court, the application be dismissed.
The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs fixed in the amount of $5,000.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 2994 of 2007
| SZLJZ |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
First Respondent
| REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
It is now 2:32pm and this matter was listed for hearing at 2:15pm. The matter had originally been listed for hearing on 11 February 2008, but on 8 February 2008 that hearing date was vacated and the matter stood over to today for hearing.
The applicant is in detention at Villawood Immigration Detention Centre. I am advised by Ms Morgan, who appears for the Minister, that the detention centre was aware that the applicant was to be brought to Court today. Ms Morgan advises me that the applicant has declined to attend and it should be noted that the matter was called outside the Court and no appearance was made.
The applicant not being present in Court, an adjournment was given for a short period in order that a facsimile could be received from the detention centre confirming the applicant’s refusal to attend today. That fax arrived a short time ago and is now Exhibit 1 on the application to dismiss. Amongst other things, that fax discloses that the “appointment” was at “14:15” today and against the box “Has the client refused to attend the appointment?” appears the word “yes”. Given these facts, the Minister seeks an order that the proceedings be dismissed for non-attendance pursuant to r.13.03A(c) of the Rules of Court.
I am satisfied that this is an appropriate order to make and the proceedings will be dismissed accordingly.
I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Cameron FM
Associate:
Date: 1 April 2008
0
0
1