FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NARG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 343 MIGRATION – directions hearing – no appearance by appellant – appeal dismissed. Federal Court Rules, Order 52 Rule 38(1)(a) NARG v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 300 OF 2003 CONTI J 10 APRIL 2003 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 300 OF 2003 BETWEEN: NARG APPELLANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: CONTI J DATE OF ORDER: 10 APRIL 2003 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The appellant is to pay the respondent'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 300 OF 2003 BETWEEN: NARG APPELLANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: CONTI J DATE: 10 APRIL 2003 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (revised from transcript) HIS HONOUR: 1 The appellant has appealed from the whole of the judgment of Federal Magistrate Driver given on 24 February 2003 whereby his Honour dismissed an application for review of a decision of the delegate for the Minister. 2 The notice of appeal dated 15 March 2003 does not disclose on its face a viable ground for appeal. It has the hallmarks of materials supplied to the appellant by a solicitor or migration agent having some knowledge of recent developments in this court and in the High Court of Australia concerning jurisdictional error and procedural fairness, but no basis for any such grounds of review are stated. 3 The appellant has not appeared at the call over this morning. His name has been called. An interpreter has kindly presented himself to the Court to be of assistance in the circumstance that the appellant had appeared. 4 Order 52 Rule 38(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rulesprovides that if an appellant has not prosecuted his appeal with due diligence the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. I am of the view that what would be appropriate is an order dismissing the appeal on this basis and I so order. I also order that the appellant pay the costs of the respondent including the costs of the proceedings today. I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Conti. Associate: Dated: 16 April 2003 Appellant: No appearance Solicitor for the Respondent: C Mantziaris Date of Directions: 10 April 2003 Date of Judgment: 10 April 2003