FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA SZDLU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 580 SZDLU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 484 OF 2005 MADGWICK J 27 APRIL 2005 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 484 OF 2005 BETWEEN: SZDLU APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: MADGWICK J DATE OF ORDER: 27 APRIL 2005 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal be dismissed. 2. The respondent's application for costs be refused. 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 484 OF 2005 BETWEEN: SZDLU APPLICANT AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT JUDGE: MADGWICK J DATE: 27 APRIL 2005 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Madgwick J: 1 This is an application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal from a judgment of Federal Magistrate Mowbray given on 2 December 2004. That judgment concerns an application by the applicant for judicial review of an adverse decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal'). 2 The learned Federal Magistrate appreciated the humanitarian predicament of the applicant, being an Indo-Fijian lady in her late sixties, all but one of whose adult children live in Australia and none of whom still live in Fiji. His Honour found that no jurisdictional error had been made by the Tribunal. The correctness of that judgment does not appear to me to be in sufficient doubt to warrant the extension of time sought, if there had been a satisfactory explanation given for the delay, which there has not. 3 The judgment sought to be appealed from was given on 2 December 2004 and it was not until 30 March 2005 that the applicant approached this Court with her application for an extension of time to appeal. Her explanation is that, taking up a suggestion of the learned Federal Magistrate, she and her family approached the Minister to exercise her powers under s 417 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and to permit the applicant to remain in Australia on humanitarian grounds. That cannot be regarded as a satisfactory explanation for failure to pursue court processes. Further, it is a reflection of the then correct assessment that it was probably hopeless to appeal. 4 Like the learned Federal Magistrate, I find it impossible not to be affected by the applicant's personal circumstances but I regret that there is nothing I can do about it. The law in relation to the proper and timely conduct of legal proceedings has to be respected too, and I am afraid that the application must be dismissed. 5 I think, however, that there is a place for compassion in relation to costs orders. I decline to order costs. I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick. Associate: Dated: 10 May 2005 Solicitor for the Applicant: The applicant appeared in person Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore Date of Hearing: 27 April 2005 Date of Judgment: 27 April 2005