SZDJA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (with Corrigendum dated 24 November 2004) [2004] FCA 1499 (16 November 2004)

Last Updated: 24 November 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZDJA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1499

CORRIGENDUM

SZDJA V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 1411 of 2004

JACOBSON J
16 NOVEMBER 2004 (CORRIGENDUM 24 NOVEMBER 2004)
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1411 OF 2004

BETWEEN:	SZDJA APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	JACOBSON J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 NOVEMBER 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

CORRIGENDA

1.	On page 1 of the Orders, beneath order 1, insert :

"2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the application for an extension of time."

2.	On page 2 of the Judgment, at [9], after "be dismissed" insert "and the applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs of the application".

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Corrigendum to the Reasons of Judgment of the Honourable Justice Jacobson.

Associate:

Dated: 24 November 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZDJA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1499

SZDJA V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 1411 of 2004

JACOBSON J
16 NOVEMBER 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1411 OF 2004

BETWEEN:	SZDJA APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	JACOBSON J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 NOVEMBER 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

3.	The application for an extension of time filed on 21 October 2004 be dismissed.

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 1411 OF 2004

BETWEEN:	SZDJA APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	JACOBSON J
DATE:	16 NOVEMBER 2004
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for an extension of time to file and serve an appeal against a judgment of a Federal Magistrate dated 17 September 2004.

2. When the matter was called on for hearing, there was no appearance by the applicant. I stood the matter down for 15 minutes until 2.30pm in case the applicant was unavoidably delayed. However, there is still no appearance.

3. Ms Rayment, for the Minister, asks me to dismiss the application for want of an appearance.

4. I am satisfied that the applicant was notified of today's hearing. The application for an extension of time was stamped by the Registry with a stamp stating that the date and time would be advised by the Registry. However, on 2 November 2004, the Appeals Support Officer of the court wrote to the applicant at the address for service given on the application, notifying him that the application had been listed for hearing before me today at 2.15 pm.

5. Accordingly, as I have said, I am satisfied that the applicant was notified of and ought to have been aware of the hearing date.

6. I am also satisfied that I have power to make the order sought by Ms Rayment. It seems to me that the power is to be found in either s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court Act 1976 ("the Act"), or Order 35A rule 2(1)(f) and rule 3(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

7. It has been necessary to refer to these rules because Order 52 rule 38A does not apply, the power conferred by that rule being limited to the case where a party is absent when an appeal is called on for hearing. Also, Order 32 rule 2 does not apply because that rule is only applicable when a proceeding is called on for trial. The definition of trial excludes interlocutory hearings.

8. Ms Rayment referred me to a recent matter of NASE v The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, which was heard by Emmett J on 11 November 2004. In that case, I gather that his Honour exercised the power under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Act in a case where there was no appearance on an application for leave to appeal. Similar considerations apply in such a case, and I, therefore, take the view that there is sufficient power to make the order sought.

9. Accordingly, the order I will make is that the application for an extension of time filed on 21 October 2004 be dismissed.

I certify that the preceding nine (9) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jacobson.

Associate:

Dated: 18 November 2004

Counsel for the Applicant:	No Appearance for the Applicant
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms B Rayment
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	16 November 2004
Date of Judgment:	16 November 2004