SZTHS v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection

[2014] FCCA 292

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZTHS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 292

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Refugee Review Tribunal.

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant at scheduled hearing – application dismissed pursuant to rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

Legislation:
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) rr.13.03C, 44.12

Applicant: SZTHS

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2254 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Emmett

Hearing date: 20 February 2014

Date of Last Submission: 20 February 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 20 February 2014

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant

Solicitors for the Respondents: Mr William Sharpe
(Sparke Helmore)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 2254 of 2013

SZTHS

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The first respondent seeks an order pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”) that the proceeding before this Court, commenced by way of application filed on 24 September 2013, be dismissed by reason of the failure of the applicant to appear at today’s scheduled hearing.

2. On 6 February 2014 the applicant attended a directions hearing before me. On that occasion I explained to the applicant that the grounds of his application made bare assertions that were unsupported by particulars and did not by themselves disclose an error capable of review by this Court. I also explained to the applicant that this Court has no power to interfere with the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the RRT”), unless the Court is satisfied that the RRT’s decision is affected by a mistake going to the jurisdiction of the RRT.

3. I provided the applicant with a copy of the applicable costs schedule of the Court and explained to the applicant the consequences that would flow if a costs order was made against him; namely, that while any costs order remain unpaid it becomes a debt to the Commonwealth of Australia, and as such would significantly affect the applicant’s ability to obtain any other type of visa or re-enter Australia.

4. The applicant confirmed that he wished to continue with the application for judicial review. To that end, I made directions giving the applicant leave to file and serve an amended application, evidence and submissions in support of his application by 13 February 2014. On that occasion the matter was set down for a show cause hearing today, pursuant to r.44.12 of the Rules, on the basis that the grounds do not appear to raise an arguable case for the relief claimed.

5. No document has been filed by or on behalf of the applicant either in accordance with the Court’s directions or otherwise. There has not been any communication received by the first respondent or the Court from the applicant either seeking an adjournment of today’s hearing, or for any other reason.

6. The application was filed on 27 September 2013, and appears to be signed by the applicant. The application clearly states the location and address of the courtroom, the date and time, being today’s date at 10:00am.

7. It is now 11am. The matter has been called outside on several occasions, the last being at 10.55am. There has been no appearance by the applicant, and there has been no communication received from the applicant, either by this Court or by the first respondent.

8. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the applicant was aware of today’s scheduled hearing, and for whatever reason has chosen not to attend. Accordingly, the orders sought by the first respondent are appropriate and the application, filed on 24 September 2013, should be dismissed with costs.

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

Associate: 

Date:    11 March 2014