Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZHDZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 140
SZHDZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD1906 OF 2007
COLLIER J
22 FEBRUARY 2008
BRISBANE (HEARD IN SYDNEY) IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD1906 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZHDZ
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: COLLIER J
DATE OF ORDER: 22 FEBRUARY 2008
WHERE MADE: BRISBANE (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed with costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD1906 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SZHDZ
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE: COLLIER J
DATE: 22 FEBRUARY 2008
PLACE: BRISBANE (HEARD IN SYDNEY)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal against a judgment of a Scarlett FM of 3 September 2007 dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") signed on 3 August 2005 and handed down on 23 August 2005. The Tribunal had affirmed a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (as it was then known) to refuse grant of a protection visa to the appellant. 2 At the hearing of this matter this morning there was no appearance by the appellant. I asked the court officer to call the matter outside the Court but there was no response. 3 Mr Kennett for the respondent sought leave to file an affidavit sworn by Pua Soliola, an administrative assistant with DLA Phillips Fox, solicitors for the first respondent, deposing that a copy of the first respondent's written submissions, together with a covering letter advising the appellant of the date and place of this morning's hearing, had been couriered to the appellant on 19 February 2008. I am satisfied that all reasonable steps have been taken to inform the appellant of the time, date and place of today's hearing. 4 My associate endeavoured to contact the appellant on the telephone number notified by the appellant and spoke with a person who identified himself as a friend of the appellant and who said that the appellant was ill today and unable to attend Court. No application has been made by the appellant for an adjournment of this hearing. 5 Notwithstanding the failure of the appellant to appear in Court this morning I consider it both possible and appropriate to give judgment on this appeal based on the material before me.
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