Zervos v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services

[2006] FCA 255

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Zervos v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services
[2006] FCA 255

GEORGE ZERVOS v SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY & COMMUNITY SERVICES

No SAD 223 of 2005

FINN J
ADELAIDE
8 FEBRUARY 2006

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 223 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	GEORGE ZERVOS APPLICANT
AND:	SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	FINN J
DATE OF ORDER:	8 FEBRUARY 2006
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The application be dismissed. 

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 223 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	GEORGE ZERVOS APPLICANT
AND:	SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	FINN J
DATE:	8 FEBRUARY 2006
PLACE:	ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant, George Zervos, has failed to appear at a specially scheduled directions hearing.  The object of the hearing was to attempt to remedy prior non-attendance by Mr Zervos at appointments with the Registrar for the purpose of preparing an Appeal Book for his proceeding in this Court which relates to an appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. 

2. To date this matter appears to have been conducted on Mr Zervos' behalf by a Mr Finikiotis, whom I understand to be the uncle of the appellant.  At a directions hearing on Friday, 28 October 2005, I made plain to Mr Finikiotis that he had no right of audience in this Court;  he was not legally qualified;  and I expected the applicant to appear in the matter, unless I was satisfied that he suffered from some disabling circumstance which prevented him from so doing.

3. The first appointment for settling the Appeal Book was on 1 December 2005.  An index to appeal documents was filed by Mr Finikiotis, but the appellant did not attend the appointment on that date.  The matter was re-listed for 3 February 2006 in anticipation of a hearing on 10 February 2006.  Again, the appellant did not attend the re-scheduled appointment.  On 6 February 2006 the appellant was notified that the matter would be set down for further directions on today's date.  Again, there has been no appearance by the appellant.

4. In these circumstances I intend to dismiss this application under O 35A of the Federal Court Rules.  He has failed to attend a directions hearing.  He has failed to do acts required to be done of him.  And he has failed to prosecute the proceeding of due diligence.  He was perfectly well aware that the matter was set down for hearing on 10 February and has taken no steps at all towards ensuring that that hearing occurred.  Accordingly, under the provisions of O 35A r 3(1), I order that the application be dismissed.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Finn.

Associate:

Dated:            17 March 2006

The Applicant did not appear.
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms M Window
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Minter Ellison
Date of Hearing:	8 February 2006
Date of Judgment:	8 February 2006