Vat v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1762

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Vat v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1762 MIGRATION – application for order of review of a decision of Refugee Review Tribunal not to grant protection visa – non-appearance by applicant at directions hearing – whether application should be dismissed for non-appearance

VU THY VAT v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N1163 OF 1999 EMMETT J 10 DECEMBER 1999 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1163 OF 1999

BETWEEN: VU THY VAT

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER: 10 DECEMBER 1999

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs. 3. The respondent inform the applicant of the provisions of O 35, r 7(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules. 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 N1163 OF 1999

BETWEEN: VU THY VAT

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE: 10 DECEMBER 1999

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This matter was first listed before me on 26 November 1999 for directions. Shortly prior to that time, a communication had been received from the applicant indicating that an application for assistance had been lodged with the Legal Aid Commission. The applicant sought an adjournment of 90 days on the ground of awaiting the outcome of the decision of the Legal Aid Commission. My associate wrote to the applicant indicating that I was not prepared to grant an adjournment of 90 days and that the applicant should appear on the date fixed for the purposes of directions being given. 2 There was, in fact, no appearance on 26 November 1999 by the applicant. I therefore stood the matter over to today for directions. I directed the respondent to notify the applicant of the further date for directions and to indicate to the applicant any steps which the respondent proposes to ask the Court to take in the light of non-appearance by the applicant. On 29 November 1999, the Minister's solicitor wrote to the applicant, indicating that the matter would be listed for further directions today and that, if the applicant failed to appear, the Minister would seek an order that the application be dismissed with costs. 3 There has been no appearance by the applicant today and an application has been made on behalf of the Minister that the matter be dismissed with costs. Accordingly, I order that the application be dismissed. I order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings. I also direct the respondent to inform the applicant of the provisions of Order 35 rule 7(2)(a)..