FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Yu Xiang Li v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 721
YU XIANG LI AND XU ZHANG V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N462 OF 2001
MOORE J
5 JUNE 2001
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N462 OF 2001
BETWEEN:
YU XIANG LI
FIRST APPLICANTXU ZHANG
SECOND APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
5 JUNE 2001
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS AND DIRECTS THAT:
1.The application is dismissed.
2.The applicants pay the respondent's costs.
3.The respondent notify the applicants within 7 days in writing at the address for service of the order I have just made.
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
N462 OF 2001
BETWEEN:
YU XIANG LI
APPLICANTXU ZHANG
SECOND APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE:
5 JUNE 2001
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MOORE J
This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 2 March 2001. There is no appearance by the applicants. The respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, seeks an order dismissing the application. What I propose to do in the circumstances is order that the application be dismissed under O10 r 3(2), having regard to the fact that the applicants have not appeared at the first directions today. The time and date of this directions hearing was noted on the application, namely 9.30 on Tuesday 5 June 2001. I am prepared to dismiss the application particularly having regard to the fact that the application itself does not, in terms, appear to raise any grounds of substance, or at least grounds of substance that are particularised in any respect. The applicants' rights under the Act and rules are preserved, notwithstanding the order that I make: see, in particular, O35 r 7(2).
I order that the application is dismissed, and the applicants pay the respondent's costs. I direct that the respondent notify the applicants within 7 days in writing at the address for service of the order I have just made.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. Associate:
Dated: 12 June 2001
The applicants did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 5 June 2001 Date of Judgment: 5 June 2001
- AGLC
- Yu Xiang Li v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 721
- Case
- [2001] FCA 721
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the application should be dismissed due to the applicants' failure to appear at the scheduled hearing. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the application contained any substantive grounds for review, as the application itself did not appear to particularise any grounds of substance. The court had to balance the procedural requirements of the Federal Court Rules with the applicants' rights under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act.
Justice Moore concluded that the application should be dismissed because the applicants did not appear at the scheduled hearing despite being duly notified of the time and date. The court found that the application did not raise any grounds of substance that warranted further judicial consideration. The court emphasised that the applicants' rights under the Act and rules were preserved despite the dismissal of the application. Consequently, the court ordered that the application be dismissed and that the applicants pay the respondent's costs. The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs was directed to notify the applicants of the court's order within seven days.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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: MOORE J
Full text does not contain this section.