SZNBD v Minister for Immigration
[2009] FMCA 668
•8 July 2009
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZNBD v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2009] FMCA 668 |
| MIGRATION – No appearance. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 |
| Applicant: | SZNBD |
| First Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
| Second Respondent: | REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File Number: | SYG 3251 of 2008 |
| Judgment of: | Raphael FM |
| Hearing date: | 8 July 2009 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 8 July 2009 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 8 July 2009 |
REPRESENTATION
| For the Applicant: | No appearance |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | DLA Phillips Fox |
ORDERS
Application dismissed pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.
Applicant to pay the First Respondent’s costs assessed in the sum of $3,000.00.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 3251 of 2008
| SZNBD |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP |
First Respondent
| REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter an application was filed with this court on 9 December 2008 seeking judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 13 November 2008 and handed down on the same day. The applicant attended a callover with the assistance of a Mandarin interpreter on 29 January 2009 when the case was set down for hearing today at 10.15a.m. The applicant was not in attendance at 10.15a.m. and was not in attendance when his name was called outside the court at 10.34a.m. The applicant was aware of the hearing today, because on 6 July he telephoned my associate and told her that he had not received any advice from the legal practitioner appointed under the Minister’s scheme. Since that time I have received a letter from the legal practitioner that advice has been given and was sent by express post to the applicant on 6 July. In any event, the applicant should have attended if he wished to seek an adjournment.
The applicant did not attend an interview offered to him by the delegate and did not attend before the Tribunal. The Tribunal expressed a lack of satisfaction as a result of the paucity of material provided by the applicant in respect of his claims.
I dismiss his application pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.
I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM
Associate:
Date: 22 July 2009
0
0
1