SZTFE v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 249

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZTFE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 249

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – No appearance.

Applicant: SZTFE

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2004 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Raphael

Hearing date: 12 February 2014

Date of Last Submission: 12 February 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 12 February 2014

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant: No appearance

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M P Cleary

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. Application dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

2. Applicant to pay the respondents’ costs assessed in the sum of $3,326.00.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT SYDNEY

SYG 2004 of 2013

SZTFE

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter the applicant, who is a citizen of Nepal, claimed that she was a person to whom Australia owes protection obligations on the grounds of her sexual orientation and political opinion.  She did not appear at an interview with the delegate of the Minister who declined to grant her the protection visa, nor did she appear at the hearing before the Tribunal which came to the same conclusion on the basis that it did not have sufficient evidence.  She came to this court on 7 November 2013 having commenced proceedings for a review of the decision of the Tribunal and on that day the matter was set down for hearing today at 10.15am.  She was not here at 10.15am and she was still not here when her name was called outside the court at 10.25am.

2. In those circumstances, I propose to dismiss the application pursuant to Part 13 Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules and to order that the applicant pay the respondents’ costs assessed in the sum of $3,326.00.

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Raphael

Associate: 

Date:  17 February 2014