FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA CZAW v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship (No 2) [2010] FCA 893 Citation: CZAW v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship (No 2) [2010] FCA 893 Appeal from: Federal Magistrates Court of Australia (orders dated 11 May 2010) Parties: CZAW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL File number: ACD 21 of 2010 Judge: BUCHANAN J Date of judgment: 17 August 2010 Date of hearing: 17 August 2010 Place: Canberra Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: No catchwords Number of paragraphs: 1 Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant appeared in person Solicitor for the First Respondent: Clayton Utz IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION ACD 21 of 2010 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: CZAW Appellant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent JUDGE: BUCHANAN J DATE OF ORDER: 17 AUGUST 2010 WHERE MADE: CANBERRA THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. There be no order as to costs. Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court's website. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION ACD 21 of 2010 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: CZAW Appellant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent JUDGE: BUCHANAN J DATE: 17 AUGUST 2010 PLACE: CANBERRA REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BUCHANAN J: 1. Immediately upon delivering a judgment in this matter, an application was made on behalf of the first respondent for an order for costs against the appellant. In the principal judgment, I identified what I thought was likely to have been the reason why the proceedings took the course which they have. I do not think that those matters are matters which may fairly be laid at the door of the appellant. In my view, this is one of those unusual cases where, despite the ordinary rule, an order for costs ought not be made. The order will be that there be no order as to costs. I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Buchanan. Associate: Dated: 18 August 2010