WZAOS v Minister for Immigration

[2011] FMCA 871

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WZAOS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2011] FMCA 871

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of decision by Refugee Review Tribunal – refusal to grant protection visa – where failure to attend hearing before Delegate – where failure to attend hearing before Tribunal – Malaysian national claiming persecution on the basis of Chinese ethnicity – application dismissed for default of appearance.

Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C(1)(c)

Applicant: WZAOS

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: PEG 167 of 2011

Judgment of: Raphael FM

Hearing date: 9 November 2011

Date of Last Submission: 9 November 2011

Delivered at: Perth

Delivered on: 9 November 2011

REPRESENTATION

For the Applicant: No appearance

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr P Graham

Solicitors for the Respondents: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. The application be dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

2. The Applicant pay the First Respondent’s costs in the sum of $3,100.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT PERTH

PEG 167 of 2011

WZAOS

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter the Applicant filed an Application on 23 June 2011 for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal[1] handed down on 19 May 2011.  It would appear that the Applicant attended a directions hearing in the matter on 15 July 2011 when, by Order of Federal Magistrate Lucev, the matter was set down for hearing at 10:15am today.

   [1] “Tribunal”.

2. The Applicant was not present in Court at 10:15am.  Nor was he present when his name was called outside the courtroom at 10:30am. 

   
   

   I note that the Applicant commenced his application for a protection visa in Sydney on 26 November 2010 with the aid of a migration agent, but then subsequently moved to Western Australia.  I note that the Applicant was offered the opportunity to attend an interview with a delegate of the Minister but did not do so, nor did he appear before the Tribunal on 6 May 2011.

3. The grounds upon which the Applicant claims that the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error do not, at first sight, point to such an error. They point solely to merits review. In all those circumstances, I propose to dismiss this matter pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Date: 16 November 2011