FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZIMU v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 316

SZIMU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

NSD 1809 of 2006

LINDGREN J

20 FEBRUARY 2007

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.         The name of the first respondent be amended to read ‘Minister for Immigration and Citizenship’.

2.         The appeal be dismissed.

3.         The appellant pay the first respondent’s costs of the appeal.

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1                     There is listed for hearing today an appeal against an order of the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia made on 29 August 2006 ([2006] FMCA 1321) dismissing SZIMU's application to that Court for a review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’), which has filed a submitting appearance on the appeal.  The Tribunal's Record of Decision was signed on 19 January 2006 and handed down on 9 February 2006.  The Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the first respondent (respectively ‘the Delegate’ and ‘the Minister’) not to grant a protection visa to SZIMU.

2                     SZIMU has not appeared today to prosecute the appeal.  Ms Evelyn Lu, a Mandarin interpreter, has attended Court for the hearing.  So, of course, have counsel and the solicitor for the Minister.

3                     The Court’s National Appeals Registrar wrote to SZIMU on 13 December 2006 advising him that his appeal would be listed for hearing today at 10.15 am.  In addition, on 14 February 2007, the solicitors for the Minister, DLA Phillips Fox, wrote to SZIMU both at his residential address and at the post office box address which he had given as his address in his notice of appeal, advising him that the matter was listed for hearing today.  That letter enclosed a copy of the Minister’s submissions and enclosed a map showing him where the Court was to be found.

4                     In addition to all of this, the interpreter, Ms Lu, has informed the Court that she had a telephone conversation with SZIMU who told her that he was in Melbourne and would not be attending the hearing.

5                     The appeal should be dismissed under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) with costs.

Associate:

Dated:         12 March 2007