SZUES v Minister for Immigration

[2015] FCCA 929

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZUES v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2015] FCCA 929

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

Legislation:

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

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

Applicant: SZUES

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 989 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 9 April 2015

Date of Last Submission: 9 April 2015

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 9 April 2015

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Solicitors for the Respondents: Mr S Speirs of Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. The application made on 10 April 2014 is dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Rules 2001 (Cth).

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 989 of 2014

SZUES

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 today an application made on 10 April 2014 pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) seeking review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 17 March 2014 which affirmed the decision of the Minister’s delegate to refuse a protection visa to the applicant.

2. When the matter was called today there was no appearance by the applicant and the Minister sought dismissal for non-appearance pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

3. The respondent’s exhibit (“RE1”) is a copy of a letter from the Minister’s solicitors to the applicant sent to his address for service, provided by the applicant on his application to the Court, being a post office box address in Berala, New South Wales. 

4. The letter (RE1) encloses the Minister’s outline of submissions, filed in these proceedings, and reminds the applicant that the matter is listed for hearing today at 10.15 am, providing the relevant location details.  The applicant is also put on notice, by way of the letter, that if he does not attend, or no one appears for him, then the Minister would seek dismissal of the application with costs. 

5. The applicant attended in person at the first Court date in this matter on 28 May 2014. He was assisted by an interpreter in the Mandarin language.  A number of orders were made for the conduct of this case. By Order 11 of 28 May 2014, the matter was set down for final hearing today. A number of other orders were made for the progress of the applicant’s case before the Court, for example, giving the applicant the opportunity to file any amended application, any evidence any way of affidavit, and written submissions. 

6. Nothing further has been filed by the applicant in these proceedings. In my view, the applicant has taken no steps to prosecute his case after attending at the first Court date.  There has been no request or application for any adjournment of the hearing today. Nor has there been any communication by the applicant, or by someone on his behalf, to the Registry of this Court, notifying of any difficulties in attending at the Court event today. 

7. The matter was set down for 10.15.  I adjourned for 25 minutes to give the applicant every opportunity to attend, in the event that there had been some transportation difficulty. It is now half an hour past the scheduled time for the hearing.  There has been no appearance by the applicant.  It is appropriate that the Minister’s application for dismissal for non-appearance be granted.  I will make the relevant order. 

8. It is appropriate that an order for costs be made in this matter in the usual way. 

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

Associate: 

Date: 15 April 2015