SZTTZ v Minister for Immigration and BORDER PROTECTION

[2014] FCCA 981

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZTTZ & ANOR v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 981

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

First Applicant: SZTTZ

Second Applicant: SZTUA

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 96 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Emmett

Hearing date: 14 May 2014

Date of Last Submission: 14 May 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 14 May 2014

REPRESENTATION

No appearance by or on behalf of the applicants

Solicitor for the Respondents: Ms Michelle Stone
(DLA Piper)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 96 of 2014

SZTTZ

First Applicant

SZTUA

Second 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 15 January 2014, be dismissed by reason of the failure of the applicant to appear at today’s scheduled hearing.

2. I note that on 5 May 2014, the applicants attended a directions hearing before me. On that occasion, Orders were made appointing the first applicant, SZTTZ, as the litigation guardian of her infant son, the second applicant, SZTUA.

3. The applicants were given leave to file and serve an amended application and evidence and submissions in support of their application by 9 May 2014. The matter was set down for hearing today pursuant to r.44.12 of the Rules before me at 10:00 am.

4. The first respondent’s solicitor, Ms Stone, read the affidavit of Katherine Elizabeth Waters, affirmed 13 May 2014, in support of the application. That affidavit, inter alia, annexed a copy of a letter, dated 12 May 2014, from the first respondent’s solicitors to the applicants at the address provided by the applicants on their initiating application, filed on 15 January 2014.

5. That letter provided the details of the hearing today, including the location of the courtroom and the time. The letter also informed the applicants that if they do not attend the hearing, the first respondent would seek to have the matter dismissed with costs for non-appearance.

6. The time now is 11.04 am. The matter has been called outside on at least two occasions, the most recent being less than five minutes ago. 

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. No document has been filed by or on behalf of the applicants. There has not been any communication received by the first respondent or the Court from the applicants either seeking an adjournment of today’s scheduled hearing, or for any other reason.

9. The orders sought by the first respondent are appropriate. Accordingly, the proceeding before this Court commenced by way of application filed on 15 January 2014 should be dismissed, pursuant to rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Rules by reason of the applicants’ failure to attend today’s scheduled hearing.

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

Associate: 

Date:    22 May 2014