Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant S77/2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2003] FCA 1604 APPLICANT S77/2002 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR N223 OF 2003 EMMETT J 27 OCTOBER 2003 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N223 OF 2003
BETWEEN: APPLICANT S77/2002
APPLICANT
AND: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER: 27 OCTOBER 2003
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. the application be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules; 2. the applicant pay the second 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 N223 OF 2003
BETWEEN: APPLICANT S77/2002
APPLICANT
AND: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE: 27 OCTOBER 2003
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 18 March 2002, the applicant commenced a proceeding in the High Court of Australia seeking prerogative writ relief in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. On 6 February 2003, Gaudron J remitted the proceeding to this Court. At that stage, the applicant was represented by Adrian Joel & Co, solicitors. On 17 October 2003, those solicitors filed a Notice of Withdrawal from acting in the proceeding. 2 In the meantime, on 6 June 2003, the applicant departed Australia. When the matter was called for hearing today there was no appearance by the applicant. The second respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, therefore seeks an order that the proceeding be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules. In the circumstances, it is appropriate to accede to that request. 3 Accordingly, I propose to order that the application be dismissed and that the applicant pay the second respondent's costs. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.
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