SZRDX v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2012] FCA 1499

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZRDX v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FCA 1499

Citation:		SZRDX v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FCA 1499
Appeal from:		SZRDX v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2012] FMCA 838
Parties:		SZRDX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File number:		NSD 1510 of 2012
Judge:		LOGAN J
Date of judgment:		16 November 2012
Date of hearing:	16 November 2012
Place:	Sydney
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	2
Counsel for the Appellant:	The Appellant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondents:	Sparke Helmore Lawyers

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1510 of 2012

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZRDX
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	LOGAN J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 NOVEMBER 2012
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal is dismissed.

2.The appellant is to pay the first respondent’s costs of and incidental to the appeal, to be taxed if not agreed.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1510 of 2012

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZRDX
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	LOGAN J
DATE:	16 NOVEMBER 2012
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. When this appeal was called on at 10.15 today there was no appearance at the bar table by or on behalf of the appellant.  The name of the case was, by my direction, called three times at the door of the court by the court officer. Once again, there was no appearance by or on behalf of the appellant.  In these circumstances the Minister’s legal representative sought that the appeal be dismissed on the basis of the occurrence of an event of default namely, non-appearance.  The court file discloses that by letter dated 19 October 2012 notice that the appeal would be heard today before me was sent to each of the parties, materially to the appellant at the address for service nominated in the notice of appeal.

2. I was also informed by the Minister’s legal representative today that the letter from his firm enclosing the Minister’s outline of submissions had been sent to that address and that that letter also had given the details as to when and where the appeal was to be heard.  In these circumstances it is evident that the appellant has been informed of the date, time and place of hearing and has chosen at that time and place not to prosecute his appeal.  I am satisfied that an event of default has occurred and that it is appropriate to dismiss the appeal.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Logan.

Associate:

Dated:       21 December 2012