SZOZI v Minister for Immigration

[2011] FMCA 361

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZOZI & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2011] FMCA 361

MIGRATION – Review of RRT decision – protection visa – no appearance – application dismissed.

Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C(1)(c)

First Applicant: SZOZI

Second Applicant: SZOZJ

Third Applicant: SZOZK

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 205 of 2011

Judgment of: Raphael FM

Hearing date: 12 May 2011

Date of Last Submission: 12 May 2011

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 12 May 2011

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicants: No appearance

Solicitors for the Respondents: Clayton Utz

THE COURT ORDERS THAT

1. The application be dismissed.

2. The Applicant pay the First Respondent’s costs assed at the sum of $4,000.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 205 of 2011

SZOZI

First Applicant

SZOZJ

Second Applicant

SZOZK

Third Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter an application was filed with the court on 10 February 2011 seeking review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 21 January 2011.  There are three applicants:  a mother, father and child, none of whom appear to speak English.  On 3 March 2011 the applicant appeared in this court before Registrar Segal with the benefit of an interpreter and was advised that the matter would be set down for hearing at 2.15pm today.  The applicant was not present at 2.15pm today but the interpreter had a telephone number for her and telephoned her.  I am informed that the applicant responded that she had no knowledge of the hearing today and that her child is sick, which indicated that she would not be appearing.

2. Mr Chami, who appears for the respondent, has asked that I dismiss the matter pursuant to Pt.13, r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth). I propose to do this but would advise the applicant that if the court receives an application in proper form supported by an affidavit, which itself exhibits some medical evidence of the applicant’s inability to attend due to her child’s ill health, within 14 days of the date upon which a copy of this judgment is sent to the applicants, the court will consider sympathetically an application to restore the matter. In the meantime, the applicant is ordered to pay the respondent’s costs which I assess in the sum of $4,000.

3. Whilst I am making reference to this case, I would note with some concern that three days ago I heard a matter, in which the respondent was represented by others, where the facts of the case were strikingly similar to those currently before me:  the association of two young Chinese former students, the birth of a child, the allegations of Christian adherence, the allegation of parental dissatisfaction with the liaison and refusal to assist and a claim that upon return the child will be treated as a “black child”.

4. I notice that the address of both sets of applicants, whilst not identical, was from the same street in the same suburb and that the person who witnessed the statutory declarations of both sets of applicants was the same Justice of the Peace.  This is possibly because the statutory declarations on the application forms were witnessed by a DIAC officer, but I am unaware. I also note that whilst neither of these applicants claims to be able to speak English, the forms are filled in in English, there was no interpreter’s certificate signed and someone had typed out statements.  I have in the past expressed my concern about the manner in which the department allows applications to be made by people who quite clearly cannot understand the document that they are signing.  I repeat those concerns and trust that they will be alleviated within the next few months.

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

Associate: 

Date:  18 May 2011