Ho v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1176

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WING CHEONG HO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

N 414 OF 2000

HELY J

24 JULY 2000

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 414 OF 2000

BETWEEN:	WING CHEONG HO APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 JULY 2000
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c).

2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.

3. The respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service.

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 414 OF 2000

BETWEEN:

WING CHEONG HO

APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	HELY J
DATE:	24 JULY 2000
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 This matter was listed for directions on 11 May 2000 before a registrar. On that occasion, Mr Ho appeared in person and his signature appears upon some short minutes of order, which include an order that the matter be listed for hearing before me at 10.15 am this morning. Directions were given that the applicant should file and serve written submissions five working days prior to the hearing date, but no such submissions have been filed or served. In accordance with the direction, the respondent lodged written submissions with the Court, and by a letter dated 19 July 2000, forwarded a copy of those submissions to the applicant at his address for service. The letter referred to the fact that the matter was fixed for hearing this morning before me.

2 Mr Ho has not appeared. I note that he also did not appear at the hearing nominated by the Refugee Review Tribunal. Mr Lloyd, who appears for the Minister, seeks an order under Order 32, rule 2(1)(c) that the proceedings should be dismissed having regard to the absence of the applicant. I think that he is entitled to an order to the effect.

3 I dismiss the proceedings pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c). I order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs in these proceedings and I direct that the respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely.

Associate:

Dated: 22 August 2000

	No appearance by the applicant

Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr S Lloyd

Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor

Date of Hearing:	24 July 2000

Date of Judgment:	24 July 2000

Top