SZRHO v Minister for Immigration

[2012] FMCA 458

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZRHO & ANOR v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2012] FMCA 458

MIGRATION – Refugee Review Tribunal – no appearance by the applicants – application dismissed.

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

First Applicant: SZRHO

Second Applicant: SZRHP

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 675 of 2012

Judgment of: Emmett FM

Hearing date: 24 May 2012

Date of Last Submission: 24 May 2012

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 24 May 2012

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by or on behalf of the applicants

Solicitor for the Respondent: Ms E Liddle

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. The proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 28 March 2012, is dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth) by reason of the failure of the applicants to attend today’s directions hearing.

2. The applicants pay the costs of the first respondent fixed in the amount of $3,100.

3. The first respondent is directed to provide to the applicants, at both their postal address and residential addresses, a copy of these Orders together with a copy of r.16.05 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

NOTE: The application for costs is in accordance with the relevant schedule in the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 675 of 2012

SZRHO

First Applicant

SZRHP

Second Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The first respondent seeks an order that the proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 28 March 2012, be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth) by reason of the failure of the applicants to appear at today’s scheduled directions hearing.

2. I note that the matter was first returnable before the Court on 15 May 2012. On that occasion, there was no appearance by the applicants.

3. Directions were made by me at that time standing the matter over for further directions today and directing that the first respondent provide a copy of the orders made by the Court on 15 May 2012 to the applicants at both the residential address and the postal address identified by the applicants. The order also noted that in the event that the applicants failed to appear today, the proceeding may be dismissed without further notice.

4. In support of the application this morning, the solicitor for the first respondent, Ms Liddle, tendered a letter, dated 15 May 2012, addressed to the applicants at the post office box and the residential address informing the applicants of the directions made by me on 15 May 2012 and further informing the applicants that if they did not attend today’s hearing, that the first respondent would seek orders from the Court that their matter be dismissed and that they pay the Minister’s legal costs of the proceedings. That letter was marked Exhibit 1R on the first respondent’s application this morning.

5. The initiating application filed on 28 March 2012 clearly identified the return date as 15 May at 11.00am and the Courtroom where the matter was to be heard.

6. There has been no communication received from the applicants at all by the registry, my chambers or the first respondent’s solicitors, either seeking an adjournment or for any other reason.

7. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the applicants were aware of today’s scheduled hearing and for whatever reason have chosen not to attend. 

8. In the circumstances, the proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 28 March 2012, should be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Emmett FM

Date:  7 June 2012