Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZDLE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 213 SZDLE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs N 1684 of 2004 JACOBSON J 7 MARCH 2005 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1684 OF 2004
BETWEEN: SZDLE
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: JACOBSON J
DATE OF ORDER: 7 MARCH 2005
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed, pursuant to Order 32 rule 2. 2. The applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.
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 1684 OF 2004
BETWEEN: SZDLE
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: JACOBSON J
DATE: 7 MARCH 2005
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1. This matter was called on for hearing this morning at 10.15. There was no appearance by the applicant. I was aware before the matter was called that it was unlikely the applicant would be present because on Friday, 4 March, 2005 the applicant faxed to my associate a letter in the following terms: "I wish to withdraw my case above before your court to Jacobson J on 7 March 2005 due to conflict of my timetable." 2. Miss Henderson, who appears for the respondent, has handed up in court a letter in similar terms. However, the letter which also bears date 4 March, 2005 and which was faxed to Mr Allatt of the Australian Government Solicitor says that the applicant wishes to withdraw the case: "Due to our phone conversation today." 3. Miss Henderson asks me to dismiss the action pursuant to order 32, rule 2(1)(c) of the Federal Court Rules by reason of the failure of the applicant to appear this morning. In my opinion in the circumstances to which I have referred it is plain that the applicant was aware of today's hearing and it is appropriate that I exercise my powers as requested by Miss Henderson and make an order that the proceeding be dismissed. 4. Accordingly, the order of the court will be that the application be dismissed pursuant to order 32, rule 2(1)(c). Miss Henderson asked for an order that the applicant pay the costs of the proceedings. In my opinion it is appropriate to make that order. Accordingly, I order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.
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