FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Yu v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2006] FCA 117YANG YU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS and MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD2502 of 2005WILCOX J
17 FEBRUARY 2006
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 2502 of 2005
BETWEEN:
YANG YU
APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENTMIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENTJUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE OF ORDER:
17 FEBRUARY 2006
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the appeal be dismissed with costs.
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
NSD 2502 of 2005
BETWEEN:
YANG YU
APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENTMIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE:
17 FEBRUARY 2006
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
WILCOX J:
This matter was called, inside and outside the court. The appellant did not appear. This is despite the fact that the appellant was recently reminded, by the respondent's solicitor, of the hearing date. I have before me an exchange of emails from which it appears that the appellant emailed the solicitor for the respondent on 8 February 2006, inquiring about the hearing time. The appellant said he could not find that information from a letter he had received. A response was sent to this email, within about half an hour, stating the matter was listed for a directions hearing on 17 February 2006 at 9.30 am at the Law Courts Building, Queens Square.
As I say, the appellant has not appeared. No information has been received by the solicitors for the respondent concerning any problem he might have had today. Nor am I aware of any attempt by him to contact the Court. Certainly there has been no contact with my chambers. In those circumstances, Mr Carter, solicitor for the respondent, asks me to exercise the power given under s 25(2B)(bb) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and order that the appeal be dismissed for failure of the appellant to attend the hearing today.
I think it is appropriate to exercise that power, having regard to the matters to which I have referred. Accordingly, pursuant to that power, I will order that the appeal be dismissed with costs.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Wilcox. Associate:
Dated: 21 February 2006
There was no appearance for the Appellant Solicitor for the First Respondent: Mr S Carter of Sparke Helmore The Second Respondent filed a Submitting Appearance. Date of Hearing: 17 February 2006 Date of Judgment: 17 February 2006
- AGLC
- Yu v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 117
- Case
- [2006] FCA 117
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Minister's decision was legally sound and whether it complied with relevant statutory provisions. Specifically, the court had to determine if the Minister's decision was made without error, whether it was based on appropriate evidence, and if it adhered to the principles of natural justice. Additionally, the court had to consider the credibility of Mr. Yu's evidence and the weight to be given to it.
The court examined the Minister's decision in detail, reviewing the evidence presented and the legal framework within which the decision was made. The court found that the Minister's decision was well-reasoned and based on a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence. The court held that the Minister did not err in law and that the decision was supported by substantial evidence. Furthermore, the court determined that the Minister's decision was not arbitrary or capricious and that it complied with the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the court ordered that the appeal be dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the appeal be dismissed with costs.
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: WILCOX J
Full text does not contain this section.