FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZNPW v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 1269
SZNPW and SZNPX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 880 of 2009
MOORE J
5 NOVEMBER 2009
SYDNEY
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION |
NSD 880 of 2009 |
|
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
SZNPW First Appellant
SZNPX Second Appellant
|
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
|
|
JUDGE: |
MOORE J |
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
5 NOVEMBER 2009 |
|
WHERE MADE: |
SYDNEY |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal from the orders of Federal Magistrate Scarlett of 28 July 2009 be dismissed.
2. The appellants to 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 eSearch on the Court’s website.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION |
NSD 880 of 2009 |
|
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
BETWEEN: |
SZNPW First Appellant
SZNPX Second Appellant
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
|
|
JUDGE: |
MOORE J |
|
DATE: |
5 NOVEMBER 2009 |
|
PLACE: |
SYDNEY |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Ex tempore
1 This is an appeal from a decision of Federal Magistrate Scarlett of 28 July 2009, dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 28 April 2009. The matter was listed for hearing today at 10:15am.
2 On 27 October 2009, the Court received a letter from the first appellant on behalf of both appellants indicating that he was presently working in Katherine, Northern Territory, and asking the Court to do one of two things - delay this hearing by a month, or undertake this hearing at Katherine. The Court replied the following day by express post. In the reply, the first appellant was advised that the appeal would be heard at 10:15am today in Sydney. The letter received on 27 October 2009 identified the address of the first appellant as a post office box in Griffith, which happens to be the appellants' address for service identified in the notice of appeal. The responsive letter from the Court was sent to that address. An annotation on the letter from the Court indicates that an SMS was sent to the mobile telephone number identified in the appellants' letter, and I infer that the SMS was to the same effect as the responsive letter.
3 I am satisfied the appellants were aware that this matter remained listed for today. Even if they were not, they had no basis for believing that the hearing had been adjourned. In view of the fact that there has been no appearance by the appellants, counsel for the Minister has applied to have the matter dismissed under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). I agree this should be done.
4 I order that the appeal be dismissed and the appellants pay the respondents' costs.
|
I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. |
Associate:
Dated: 5 November 2009
|
Counsel for the Respondents: |
R Francois |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Respondents: |
Clayton Utz |
|
Date of Hearing: |
5 November 2009 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
5 November 2009 |
