Specialist in Australian Immigration, Migration Consultant and Online Australian Visa Assessment Service.
Australian Immigration Specialists - Australian Immigration Consultants Online Australian Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia
  Research Home

Categories
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Federal Court
Federal Magistrates Court
Full Federal Court
High Court
Migration Review Tribunal
Other Jurisdictions
Refugee Review Tribunal
Recently Added
Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51 (6 September 2001)
Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] HCA 43 (9 September 2004)
Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal; Lie v Refugee Review Tribunal [2002] HCA 30

"Use the Migration Specialists that migration agents use"
Cases

MIGRATION - Application to review decision of Refugee Review Tribunal - no appearance by applicant.

NAUH v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 567 (18 August 2004)

NAUH v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 567 (18 August 2004)
Last Updated: 14 October 2004

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAUH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION
[2004] FMCA 567



MIGRATION - Application to review decision of Refugee Review Tribunal - no appearance by applicant.



Applicant:
NAUH



Respondent:


MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS



File No:


SZ1815 of 2003



Delivered on:


18 August 2004



Delivered at:


Sydney



Hearing date:


18 August 2004



Judgment of:


Barnes FM



REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:


Nil



Solicitors for the Applicant:


Nil



Counsel for the Respondent:


Mr T. Reilly



Solicitors for the Respondent:


Australian Government Solicitor



ORDERS

(1) That there being no appearance by the applicant the application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

(2) That the respondent notify the applicant of the orders made today and of the effect of Rule 16.05 of the Federal Magistrate Court Rules by letter sent by prepaid post to the applicant at his last notified address within seven days of today's date.

(3) That the applicant pay the respondent's costs set in the amount of $4000.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES

COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT

SYDNEY


SZ1815 of 2003

NAUH


Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS




Respondent


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Revised from transcript)

1. This is an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal handed down on 10 July 2003 affirming a decision of a delegate of the respondent to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant sought review of that decision by application filed in the Federal Court on 30 July 2003. The matter was transferred to this Court. It is apparent from the Court file that the applicant attended the directions hearing on 15 August 2003 at which orders were made by consent for the filing of documents. The matter was to be listed on a date to be advised.

2. The Court file contains a letter to the applicant sent to his address for service advising that the matter was set down for final hearing at 10.15am today, Wednesday, 18 August 2004. While the consent orders that were made at the directions hearing provided for the filing of any further amended application, no further amended application has been filed. Nor has the applicant filed any written submissions. The respondent has filed written submissions.

3. When the matter was called today, the applicant was not present. An effort was made to contact him on the telephone. That was successful. He advised that he had understood that the hearing was in September and that he would be at Court within half an hour. There is absolutely nothing in the Court file to indicate that there was any reason for him to have an understanding that the hearing would be in September. The Court adjourned to allow the applicant time to appear. However he has not appeared at the time that he said he would attend. In these circumstances I consider that he has been given the opportunity to appear and has chosen not to do so. If it emerges that there is in fact a legitimate reason for his non-attendance, no doubt that will be brought to the attention of the Court. I will, as part of the orders, require that the respondent notify the applicant by letter sent by pre-paid post to his last notified address within seven days of today's date of the effect of the orders made today and also of the effect of rule 16.05 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.

4. In all the circumstances I consider that it is appropriate to dismiss the matter because the applicant has not appeared pursuant to Rule 13.03A(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules.


RECORDED : NOT TRANSCRIBED

5. The applicant has been unsuccessful. It is appropriate that he meet the respondent's costs. The amount sought is $4000. In light of the nature of this and other similar matters I consider that that is an appropriate amount.

I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Barnes FM

Associate:

Date:
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia