SZSVS v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 254

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZSVS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 254

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Application for review of Refugee Review Tribunal decision – no appearance by the applicant – application dismissed for non-appearance.

Legislation:

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

Applicant: SZSVS

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 1035 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 10 February 2014

Date of Last Submission: 10 February 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 10 February 2014

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No appearance

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr Bevan

Solicitors for the Respondents: Minter Ellison

ORDERS

1. The title of the first respondent is amended to read Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. 

2. The application made on 14 May 2013 is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

3. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs, set in the amount of $6,646.00. 

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1035 of 2013

SZSVS

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex Tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. I have before me an application made pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”) on 14 May 2013, seeking review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) made on 9 April 2013, which affirmed the decision of the Minister’s delegate to refuse the grant of a protection visa to the applicant.

2. When the matter was called today there was no appearance by the applicant. Mr Bevan of counsel appeared for the first respondent.

3. The Minister sought that the application be dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”).

4. I take into account the respondent’s Exhibit 1 , a letter from the Court dated 23 January 2014, addressed to the applicant and the first respondent’s solicitors at their respective addresses for service, setting out the correct date, time and location of the hearing today.

5. I also take into account the respondent’s Exhibit 2, a letter from the first respondent’s solicitors, dated the 3 February 2014, to the applicant at his address for service, setting out the correct date, time and location of the hearing today.

6. I also have before me the orders made on 29 May 2013, at the first Court date for this matter, where the applicant appeared in person with the assistance of an interpreter in the Nepali language, which set out the time and date of the hearing today.

7. As a result of the exhibits before me, and the applicant’s attendance at the first Court date for this matter, I am satisfied that the applicant has had reasonable notice of the date, time and location of the Court event today.

8. I am satisfied, in absence of any communication from the Court’s Registry, that the applicant has not sought to notify the Court of any difficulty in attending the hearing today, or to seek any adjournment.

9. In the circumstances, it is appropriate that the matter be dismissed, pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Rules. I shall make an order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding nine (9) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date:  17 February 2014