TANG v Minister for Immigration

Case

[2012] FMCA 1263

19 December 2012


FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TANG v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2012] FMCA 1263
MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – non-appearance by applicant – application dismissed.
Federal Magistrate Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C(1)(c)
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476
Applicant: TAO TANG
First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP
Second Respondent: MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File Number: SYG 2320 of 2012
Judgment of: Nicholls FM
Hearing date: 19 December 2012
Date of Last Submission: 19 December 2012
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 19 December 2012

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: No Appearance
Appearing for the Respondents: Ms N Johnson
Solicitors for the Respondents: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

  1. The application made on 17 October 2012 is dismissed, pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

  2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs, set in the amount of $2,500.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 2320 of 2012

TAO TANG

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex tempore; Revised from Transcript)

  1. On 17 October 2012, the applicant made an application to this Court pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), seeking review of the decision of the Migration Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), made on 20 September 2012, refusing to grant the applicant a ‘Student (Temporary) (Class TU)’ visa.

  2. At the first court date on 31 October 2012, I made a number of orders for the progression of this case, including that the matter be set down for further directions on 19 December 2012 at 11:00am. That is today. The applicant attended at the first court date in person and had the assistance of an interpreter in the Mandarin language. When the matter was called just past 11.15am today, there was no appearance by the applicant. No request for an adjournment has been made. There has been no other communication from the applicant to the Court. I accept also, nor to the Minister’s solicitors. Further, I note that all of the opportunities provided to the applicant to file further material, he has not taken up those opportunities.

  3. In light of the non-appearance by the applicant today, the Minister has sought that I dismiss the application, pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

  4. Given what I have said, it is appropriate, in my view that the matter be disposed of in that way.

Costs

  1. I also have an application for costs before me, set in the sum of $2,500. 

  2. It is appropriate that an order for costs be made. There is nothing before me to argue against the making of such an order. I note that, in that regard, the Minister has prepared multiple copies of the Court Book. They have been filed and served. A formal response has also been made, in addition to various attendances by the Minister at Court. 

  3. I am satisfied that the amount sought is a reasonable amount. In all the circumstances, I will make an order for costs in the amount sought.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Nicholls FM

Associate: 

Date:  1 February 2013

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

2