FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Tjiuw v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1030
DJIN KHIONG TJIUW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 347 OF 2000
HELY J
21 JULY 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 347 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
DJIN KHIONG TJIUW
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:
21 JULY 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application be dismissed with costs.
2.A copy of this order be served on the applicant by the respondent.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 347 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
DJIN KHIONG TJIUW
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
HELY J
DATE:
21 JULY 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This matter was commenced by an application for an order of review filed on 13 April 2000. The matter was listed for directions on 4 May 2000. On that occasion there was no appearance by the applicant and the matter was stood over to 11 May 2000. On 8 May 2000 the applicant wrote to the court apologising for his non-attendance on 4 May and giving some explanation for that failure. The letter stated that the applicant had lodged an application with the New South Wales Bar Association for legal assistance.
The matter came on for further directions on 11 May 2000. On that occasion short minutes of order signed by the applicant were made by consent. Those orders included fixing the matter for hearing before me this morning, as well as a direction that the applicant should file and serve written submissions five working days prior to the hearing of the application. No such submissions have been filed. On 18 July 2000 Stephen Chan of YM Global Australia Pty Limited, a migration agent, wrote to the Australian Government Solicitor indicating that the applicant was still seeking assistance from the Bar Association and that he had forwarded the Green Book to the Bar Association's office for their assessment. The letter continues:
“In the meantime, Mr Tjiuw will appear on 21 July 2000 and will seek adjournment if a result from the Bar Association is not known at that time.”
When the matter was called on for hearing this morning the applicant did not appear. Mr Markus seeks an order under Order 32 rule 2(1)(c). In the circumstances I think that such an order should be made. I therefore order that the application be dismissed with costs. I direct that a copy of this order be served upon the applicant by the respondent. I should add that an interpreter arranged by the court was present this morning in the expectation that the applicant would attend. Mr Hartanto, I am sorry that your time has been wasted; thank you for coming.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely. Associate:
Dated: 1 August 2000
No appearance by the applicant Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 21 July 2000 Date of Judgment: 21 July 2000
- AGLC
- Tjiuw v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1030
- Case
- [2000] FCA 1030
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister's decision to cancel Tjiuw's visa was lawful and whether it was based on appropriate consideration of the statutory criteria. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the Minister's decision was unreasonable, as Tjiuw argued it was not supported by the evidence and failed to properly consider relevant mitigating factors.
The court found that the Minister's decision was well within the bounds of lawful exercise of discretion. The evidence presented justified the Minister's conclusion that Tjiuw did not meet the character requirements for visa retention. The court also held that the Minister had adequately considered all relevant factors, including Tjiuw's criminal history and the nature of his offending. The court dismissed Tjiuw's application for judicial review, finding that the Minister's decision was neither arbitrary nor irrational. The court further held that the Minister's decision was reasonable in the circumstances, and therefore, the application was dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application be dismissed with costs.
2. A copy of this order be served on the applicant by the respondent.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: HELY J
Full text does not contain this section.