SZMOV v Minister for Immigration
[2008] FMCA 1216
•25 August 2008
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZMOV & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2008] FMCA 1216 |
| MIGRATION – Refugee Review Tribunal – practice and procedure – dismissal pursuant to Rule 13.03A of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 by reason of failure of the applicant to appear. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, rr.13.03A, 44.12 |
| First Applicant: | SZMOV |
| Second Applicant: | SZMOW |
| Third Applicant: | SZMOX |
| Fourth Applicant: | SZMOY |
| First Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
| Second Respondent: | REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File Number: | SYG 1992 of 2008 |
| Judgment of: | Emmett FM |
| Hearing date: | 25 August 2008 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 25 August 2008 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 25 August 2008 |
REPRESENTATION
| No appearance |
| Solicitors for the Respondents: | Ms L. Buchanan, Australian Government Solicitor |
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 1992 of 2008
| SZMOV |
First Applicant
| SZMOW |
Second Applicant
| SZMOX |
Third Applicant
| SZMOY |
Fourth Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
First Respondent
| REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The first respondent seeks an order pursuant to r.13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001. That rule provides that if a party to a proceeding is absent from a hearing the Court may dismiss the application.
On 1 August 2008, the applicants filed their initiating application and on that occasion the matter was set down for a first Court date directions hearing on 18 August 2008.
On 18 August 2008, the first respondent sought a show cause hearing pursuant to r.44.12 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 and that hearing was set down for 22 August 2008 at 10.30 am.
On 21 August 2008 the parties were notified by the Court that the matter would be relisted for hearing today at 11.30am. A letter was sent by my chambers to the applicants on 21 August 2008 by courier addressed to the applicants at their home address. On their application the applicants had also nominated an address for receiving mail, being a post office box at Strathfield. No letter was sent to that address. However, on 22 August 2008, upon receipt of the letter dated 21 August 2008 from my chambers, the first applicant telephoned chambers requesting an adjournment of the matter. No adjournment was granted.
On 22 August 2008, the Court sent a further letter to the applicants at their home address by courier confirming the date and time of the hearing as today at 11.30am.
The first respondent tendered a letter in support of the application this morning for dismissal pursuant to 13.03A(c) of the Act, dated 21 August 2008. This letter was marked exhibit 1R. The letter is addressed to the applicants at their home address and copied to the applicants at their post office box. I note that the letter states that the letter to the home address was sent by courier on 21 August 2008 and by Express Post to the post office box by 21 August 2008.
The letter from the first respondent informs the applicants of the hearing this morning and informs them that if they failed to attend that the first respondent may seek orders that the application be dismissed with costs. I note that the letter also enclosed a copy of submissions filed on behalf of the first respondent on 21 August 2008.
In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the applicants are, or should have been aware of, the hearing this morning and in the circumstances I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make the orders sought by the first respondent.
I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Emmett FM
Deputy Associate: E. Maconachie
Date: 28 August 2008
0
0
1