SZVCI v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 3198

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZVCI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 3198

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: SZVCI

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2594 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 22 October 2014

Date of Last Submission: 22 October 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 22 October 2014

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: No Appearance

Solicitors for the Respondents: Ms N Johnson of Mills Oakley Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The application made on 18 September 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 $1,331.00.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 2594 of 2014

SZVCI

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 18 September 2014 pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) seeking review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 15 August 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 at the first Court date in this matter, there was no appearance by, or for, the applicant. The Minister sought that the application be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the FCC Rules”).

3. Before the Court, in evidence, is respondent’s exhibit one and two (“RE1” and “RE2”). Based on the notation by the Court’s Registry on the application form of the date and time of listing, and the above evidence, I am satisfied, on what is before me, that the applicant had reasonable notice of the Court event today. 

4. I also have before me the affidavit of Ms Nicola Johnson, Solicitor, of 7 October 2014, which provides an explanation for the applicant’s

   
   

   non-appearance. That is, that the applicant has left Australia and has no authority to re-enter Australia.

5. I note that the applicant is not represented by anyone else here today. While the applicant’s absence today is explained, in the sense that the applicant is physically not in Australia, the inference is available to be drawn that the applicant does not wish to proceed with the prosecution of the application by the lack of any other representation before the Court today.

6. In all the circumstances, therefore, it is appropriate that I make the order that the Minister seeks. I will make the order pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the FCC Rules dismissing the application.

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

Associate: 

Date: 11 December 2015