SZSNJ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2013] FCCA 40

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZSNJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2013] FCCA 40

MIGRATION – Application pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) – dismissed for want of appearance.

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

Applicant: SZSNJ

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 104 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 27 March 2013

Date of Last Submission: 27 March 2013

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 27 March 2013

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: Did not appear

Appearing for the Respondents: Ms. Given

Solicitors for the Respondents: Minter Ellison

ORDERS

1. The application made on 21 January 2013 is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001.

2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs set in the amount of $1296.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT SYDNEY

SYG 104 of 2013

SZSNJ

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. This is an application filed in this Court on 21 January 2013 seeking review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") made on 20 December 2012 to affirm the decision of the delegate of the respondent Minister made on 8 June 2012 to refuse a protection visa to the applicant.

2. From the application made to the Court and the material annexed to the affidavit filed at the time of making that application, it appears that the applicant is a citizen of the People’s Republic of China (“China”) who sought protection in Australia on the basis of his claimed Christian beliefs and practices in China that brought him to the adverse attention of the Chinese authorities.

3. When the matter was called today the applicant did not appear. Nor was there any appearance on his behalf. The Court was unaware of any request for an adjournment.

4. The Minister, through his representative (Ms. S. Given), sought that the application be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules. That is, for want of appearance by the applicant.

5. The Minister relied on a letter sent to the applicant, at his addresses for service as set out in his application, as to notice of the Court event today. I marked this letter as Respondent’s Exhibit “1” (“RE 1”).

6. I am satisfied having regard to RE 1 that the applicant had reasonable notice of the time, date and place for the Court event today in relation to his application.

7. When the matter was called just before 10 am there was no appearance by the applicant. There is still no appearance. That is 45 minutes after the scheduled, notified time. I am satisfied in the circumstances that the matter should be dismissed for lack of want of appearance. I will make the order sought by the Minister.

8. I am also satisfied that an order for costs should be made in this matter. As to the amount, I am satisfied that the amount sought is a reasonable amount having regard to what is set out in the Schedule to the rules of this Court as the guideline in matters of this type. I am otherwise satisfied that the amount is reasonable given the work that the Minister’s solicitors have done to date.

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

Associate: 

Date: 15 April 2013