Chang v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 556
| IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
| Appellant | |
| AND: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
| DATE OF ORDER: | |
| WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
2. The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
| VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
| GENERAL DIVISION | VID 185 of 2014 |
| ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
| BETWEEN: | NYUK TAI CHANG Appellant |
| AND: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
| JUDGE: | BROMBERG J |
| DATE: | 27 MAY 2014 |
| PLACE: | MELBOURNE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 This is an appeal from the judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia published as Chang v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCCA 572. By that judgment, the primary judge dismissed with costs an application for judicial review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal, which refused to grant the appellant (Mr Chang) an Employer Nomination (Residence) (Class BW) visa. Mr Chang has appealed to this Court from that judgment.
2 The appeal was listed for hearing commencing this morning at 10.15 am. When the matter was called on for hearing there was no appearance by Mr Chang. I am satisfied that Mr Chang has been made aware of the hearing date and the potential for his appeal to be dismissed as a result of his non-attendance at the hearing. I am satisfied that notice of those matters was provided to Mr Chang including by correspondence from the first respondent’s solicitors of 24 April and 30 May 2014.
3 As outlined by Gray J in Al Mamun v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011] FCA 1394 at [10], there are three possible courses open to me owing to the non-appearance of Mr Chang. I could adjourn the hearing of the appeal and provide Mr Chang with a further opportunity to attend at a later time. I could exercise a power given to the Court by s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to dismiss the appeal for the failure of Mr Chang to attend a hearing related to the appeal. Alternatively, I could proceed to attempt to deal with the appeal on its merits in the absence of Mr Chang.
4 For the reasons given at [11] to [13] by Gray J, I take the view that in the circumstances the interests of justice would be best served by making an order dismissing the appeal on the ground of the failure of Mr Chang to attend the hearing.
5 Accordingly, I will make an order dismissing the appeal and a further order that Mr Chang pay the first respondent’s costs.
| I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Bromberg. |
Associate:
