FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Singh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1625 VINAY SINGH & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 972 of 2004 HILL J 6 DECEMBER 2004 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 972 OF 2004 BETWEEN: VINAY SINGH & ORS APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: HILL J DATE OF ORDER: 6 DECEMBER 2004 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applications be dismissed. 2. The applicants 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 972 OF 2004 BETWEEN: VINAY SINGH & ORS APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: HILL J DATE: 6 DECEMBER 2004 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT HILL J: 1 Before the Court is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal, affirming the decision of a Delegate of the respondent Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, that the applicants were not entitled to the grant of a Business Skills (Residence) Class BH (Visas). 2 A directions hearing in the matter was held on 16 July 2004 at which Mr Singh, one of the applicants, was present. Directions were made including that the matter be listed for hearing this morning at 10.15am. When the matter was called on for hearing the applicants were not present. Counsel for the respondent requests that in accordance with Order 32 Rule 2(1)(c) of the Federal Court Rules, the proceedings be dismissed. I would accede to that application. 3 I should say that I have read the Tribunal's decision. There is nothing to suggest that the Tribunal made any jurisdictional error. The orders I would make accordingly are that: (1) the applications be dismissed; (2) the applicants pay the 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 Hill. Associate: Dated: 14 December 2004 No appearance for the Applicant Counsel for the Respondent: J A C Potts Solicitor for the Respondent: Clayton Utz Date of Hearing: 6 December 2004 Date of Judgment: 6 December 2004