Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Ho v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1176
WING CHEONG HO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 414 OF 2000 HELY J 24 JULY 2000 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 414 OF 2000
BETWEEN: WING CHEONG HO
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HELY J
DATE OF ORDER: 24 JULY 2000
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c). 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings. 3. The respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service. 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 N 414 OF 2000
BETWEEN: WING CHEONG HO
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HELY J
DATE: 24 JULY 2000
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This matter was listed for directions on 11 May 2000 before a registrar. On that occasion, Mr Ho appeared in person and his signature appears upon some short minutes of order, which include an order that the matter be listed for hearing before me at 10.15 am this morning. Directions were given that the applicant should file and serve written submissions five working days prior to the hearing date, but no such submissions have been filed or served. In accordance with the direction, the respondent lodged written submissions with the Court, and by a letter dated 19 July 2000, forwarded a copy of those submissions to the applicant at his address for service. The letter referred to the fact that the matter was fixed for hearing this morning before me. 2 Mr Ho has not appeared. I note that he also did not appear at the hearing nominated by the Refugee Review Tribunal. Mr Lloyd, who appears for the Minister, seeks an order under Order 32, rule 2(1)(c) that the proceedings should be dismissed having regard to the absence of the applicant. I think that he is entitled to an order to the effect. 3 I dismiss the proceedings pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(1)(c). I order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs in these proceedings and I direct that the respondent serve a copy of this order on the applicant by posting it to him at his address for service. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate