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

1 This is a case where it is necessary for the applicant to obtain leave to appeal. Gyles J summarily dismissed the application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. The applicant does not appear, despite his name being called outside the court. No information has been received by the respondent or by the Court registry to explain his absence.

NAYF v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2

NAYF v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 228 (16 August 2004)
Last Updated: 23 August 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA


NAYF v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2004] FCAFC 228



































NAYF v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 250 of 2004


WILCOX, EMMETT and DOWNES JJ
16 AUGUST 2004
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 250 of 2004


BETWEEN: NAYF
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: WILCOX, EMMETT and DOWNES JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 16 AUGUST 2004
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY


THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay the costs of the respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs.














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 N 250 of 2004


BETWEEN: NAYF
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT


JUDGES: WILCOX, EMMETT and DOWNES JJ
DATE: 16 AUGUST 2004
PLACE: SYDNEY


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1 This is a case where it is necessary for the applicant to obtain leave to appeal. Gyles J summarily dismissed the application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. The applicant does not appear, despite his name being called outside the court. No information has been received by the respondent or by the Court registry to explain his absence.

2 In the circumstances, the appropriate order is that the application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs. We so order.


I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justices Wilcox, Emmett and Downes.



Associate:

Dated: 20 August 2004





There was no appearance for the Applicant.




Counsel for the Respondent: Mr T Reilly



Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore



Date of Hearing: 16 August 2004



Date of Judgment: 16 August 2004
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia