NAFX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 122

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAFX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 122 MIGRATION – application for a protection visa – judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal – no appearance by the applicant. Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 39B Migration Act 1958 (Cth) NAFX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 1348 OF 2002 HILL J 14 FEBRUARY 2003 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1348 OF 2003

BETWEEN: NAFX

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HILL J

DATE OF ORDER: 14 FEBRUARY 2003

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent Minister's costs. 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 1348 OF 2003

BETWEEN: NAFX

APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HILL J

DATE: 14 FEBRUARY 2003

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application brought by the applicant against the respondent Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Indigenous Affairs under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), as made applicable by the provisions of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal refusing to grant to her a protection (class XA) visa and accordingly, affirming the decision of the respondent Minister. The matter was originally before the court on 3 February 2003 when there was no appearance on behalf of the applicant. 2 On that day I directed the respondent Minister to advise the applicant that she had in essence two alternatives; the first was to accept the orders in the draft short minutes of order, which the Minister forwarded to her; the second alternative was to attend today when I would consider making alternative orders. I also requested the Minister to advise her that if neither these courses were adopted, I would consider making orders having the application dismissed. 3 I have received a copy of a letter addressed to the applicant dated 4 February 2003, in compliance with those orders. I will mark the copy of the letter 'A' in these proceedings. There is no appearance again today and accordingly, I would order that the application be dismissed and that the applicant pay the Minister's costs of it. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hill.