FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZNVW (No 2) [2010] FCAFC 44
|
Citation: |
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZNVW (No 2) [2010] FCAFC 44 |
|
|
Appeal from: |
SZNVW v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2009] FMCA 1299 |
|
|
Parties: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP v SZNVW and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
|
|
File number(s): |
NSD 96 of 2010 |
|
|
Judges: |
KEANE CJ, EMMETT AND PERRAM JJ |
|
|
Date of judgment: |
20 May 2010 |
|
|
Catchwords: |
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal – Whether Full Federal Court has power to set aside its own perfected orders – “Slip rule” – Allows rectification of orders where they do not accurately reflect reasons of the court |
|
|
Legislation: |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Cases cited: |
DJL v Central Authority (2000) 201 CLR 226 applied |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of hearing: |
31 March 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of last submissions: |
31 March 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Place: |
Sydney |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Division: |
GENERAL DIVISION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category: |
Catchwords |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of paragraphs: |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Appellant: |
S B Lloyd SC with T Reilly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Appellant: |
DLA Phillips Fox |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the First Respondent: |
N J Williams SC with S Prince |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the First Respondent: |
No appearance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Second Respondent: |
The second respondent did not appear |
|
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY |
|
|
GENERAL DIVISION |
NSD 96 of 2010 |
|
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP Appellant
|
|
|
AND: |
SZNVW First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
|
|
JUDGES: |
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
20 MAY 2010 |
|
WHERE MADE: |
SYDNEY |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Order 2 made by this Court on 10 May 2010 be set aside.
2. In lieu thereof it be ordered that the orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court on 22 December 2009 be set aside and in lieu thereof it be ordered that:
(a) The applicant's application be dismissed.
(b) The applicant pay the first respondent's costs.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY |
|
|
GENERAL DIVISION |
NSD 96 of 2010 |
|
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
BETWEEN: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP Appellant
|
|
AND: |
SZNVW First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
|
|
JUDGES: |
KEANE CJ, EMMETT AND PERRAM JJ |
|
DATE: |
20 MAY 2010 |
|
PLACE: |
SYDNEY |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 This Court delivered judgment in this matter on 10 May 2010. Order 2 of those orders was in these terms:
2. The decision of the magistrate be set aside.
2 That order contains two slips. First, the Court below was not the Federal Magistrate but, in fact, the Federal Magistrates Court. Secondly, the orders of the Court did not dispose of the proceeding before that Court. It was the intention of the Court by its earlier reasons that the proceeding before the Federal Magistrates Court should have been dismissed with costs. The orders, by oversight, failed to do this. In those circumstances, it is appropriate to exercise the power under Order 35 rule 7(3) Federal Court Rules which allows a court to rectify perfected orders “when it can be shown that a court order does not correctly reflect the court’s decision as contained in its reasons”: DJL v Central Authority (2000) 201 CLR 226 at 263 [93] per Kirby J (with whom Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ agreed at 244 [34]). We would set aside Order 2 made on 10 May 2010, ex mero motu, and in lieu thereof order that:
The orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court on 22 December 2009 be set aside and in lieu thereof it be ordered that:
(a) The applicant's application be dismissed.
(b) The applicant pay the first respondent's costs.
|
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Chief Justice Keane and Justices Emmett and Perram |
Associate:
Dated: 20 May 2010
