Maharaj v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1559

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Maharaj v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1559 ASISH RITESH MAHARAJ & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 1138 OF 2001 EMMETT J 10 OCTOBER 2001 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1138 OF 2001

BETWEEN: ASISH RITESH MAHARAJ

FIRST APPLICANT

GEETANJALI REETA MAHARAJ

SECOND APPLICANT

PAYAL PRIYANKA MAHARAJ

THIRD APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER: 10 OCTOBER 2001

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Leave be granted to Henshaws Solicitors to cease acting for the applicants. 2. The application be dismissed. 3. The applicants pay the respondent's costs.

THE COURT ORDERS DIRECTS THAT: 4. The respondent inform the applicants as soon as practicable of the terms of these orders 5. The respondent inform the applicants of the provisions of Order 32 Rule 2(2) and Order 35 Rule 7(2)(a). 6. Notification be given to the applicants at the address shown in the correspondence from their solicitors and at any other address known to the Minister.

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 1138 OF 2001

BETWEEN: ASISH RITESH MAHARAJ

FIRST APPLICANT

GEETANJALI REETA MAHARAJ

SECOND APPLICANT

PAYAL PRIYANKA MAHARAJ

THIRD APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE: 10 OCTOBER 2001

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 When this matter first came before me on 7 September 2001 the applicants were represented by Mr Cairns of counsel. On that occasion I gave the applicants leave to file an amended application and gave directions for the filing of affidavits and submissions. I set the matter down for hearing today at 10.15 am. When the matter was called today there was no appearance for the applicants. However, Mr Canceri appeared to seek leave on behalf of the solicitors who had filed the application, to withdraw from the proceedings. 2 Order 45 Rule 7, relevantly provides: "(1) Where a solicitor acts for a party to any proceeding and afterwards ceases to act, the solicitor may, subject to subrule (2), file notice of the change and serve the notice on the parties. (2) A solicitor shall not file or serve notice of a change under subrule (1) without leave of the Court unless he has, not less than 7 days before doing so, served on his former client notice of his intention to file and serve the notice of change."