SZUID v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 3205

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZUID v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 3205

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Application for review of the 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: SZUID

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 1254 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 8 October 2014

Date of Last Submission: 8 October 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 8 October 2014

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: No Appearance

Solicitors for the Respondents: Ms E Warner Knight of Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

1. The application made on 12 May 2014 is dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs set in the amount of $3,326.00.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1254 of 2014

SZUID

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 12 May 2014 pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), seeking review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 9 April 2014 which affirmed the decision of the Minister’s delegate to refuse a Protection (Class XA) visa to the applicant.

2. At the first Court date in this matter, 2 July 2014, the applicant appeared in person.  The applicant was assisted by an interpreter in the Mandarin language at that Court event.

3. A number of orders were made for the progress of the applicant’s case on that day, including the usual orders as to the filing and service of any amended application, and any additional evidence by way of affidavit.  The matter was set down for mention today at 9.30 am. 

4. Nothing further has been filed by the applicant.  The applicant was on notice, as of that date, through the assistance of the interpreter in the Mandarin language, that the matter was set down today at 9.30 am for mention.  I also have regard to the respondent’s exhibit one (“RE1”), which is a letter dated 3 July 2014, addressed to the applicant at the address for service, provided on the application to the Court, further reminding the applicant of today’s Court event. 

5. When the matter was again called at 10 am there was no appearance by, or for, the applicant.  There is no request for any adjournment that I am aware of.  Nothing has been heard from the Court’s Registry that the applicant made any attempt to explain any difficulty with attending at Court today or, indeed, sought any adjournment.  The applicant’s absence remains unexplained.

6. In all the circumstances, it is appropriate that the application be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth). I will make the order that the Minister seeks.

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date:  4 March 2016