FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZTNW v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 619
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
Applicant | |
AND: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
DATE OF ORDER: | |
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for extension of time and leave to appeal be dismissed under r 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | NSD 1117 of 2014 |
BETWEEN: | SZTNW Applicant |
AND: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
JUDGE: | BENNETT J |
DATE: | 9 FEBRUARY 2015 |
PLACE: | SYDNEY |
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 On 26 October 2014, the applicant filed an application for extension of time and leave to appeal. It was necessary for the applicant to seek an extension of time as the application for leave to appeal was filed more than 28 days after the decision of the Federal Circuit Court. That was an interlocutory decision and an application for leave to appeal should have been filed within 14 days (Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 35.13(a) (the Rules)). The applicant was notified by the Court on 28 January 2015 that the matter was to be listed at 2.15pm on 9 February 2015 before me.
2 The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (the Minister) has filed a written outline of submissions and they were served on the applicant by express post on 2 February 2015. A covering letter was sent, accompanying the outline of submissions, stating that the matter was listed on 9 February 2015 at 2.15 pm before Bennett J. The Minister also informed the applicant in that letter that, if he does not attend, the Minister will seek orders from the Court that the matter be dismissed and that the applicant pay the Minister’s legal costs for the proceedings.
3 No written submissions were filed on behalf of the applicant. When the matter was called for hearing, the applicant did not appear. The matter was called outside the Court and there was no appearance. I adjourned the matter for a short period of time to enable the Minister’s solicitor to attempt to contact the applicant on the telephone number that he had given. I am informed that the solicitor rang twice and, on each occasion, the number rang out. There has still been no appearance by the applicant some 20 minutes after the matter was listed for hearing.
4 The Minister seeks to have the matter dismissed pursuant to r 35.33 of the Rules in that the applicant was absent when his application was called on for hearing.
5 In the circumstances it, it is appropriate to dismiss the application pursuant to r 35.33 of the Rules and the applicant should pay the Minister'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 Bennett. |
Associate:
