JNJ24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 2097

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 24.04(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 24.04 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth).

(Delivered ex tempore and revised from the transcript)

1. This matter is listed before me today for hearing of the applicant's application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal). The Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant the applicant a protection visa.
2. When the matter was called, there was no appearance by or for the applicant. Counsel for the Minister made an oral application for the applicant's application to be dismissed pursuant to r 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth) (GFL Rules).
3. The applicant was notified of the listing for hearing today by way of an email sent from my associate to the parties on 10 October 2025, which has been marked as exhibit 1. That email was sent to the applicant at the email address recorded in his application and affidavit, which were both lodged on 3 November 2024 at 5.19pm and, in circumstances where 3 November 2024 was a Sunday, were taken to have been filed on Monday 4 November 2024. The email address recorded in those documents is the most recent email address for service that the applicant has provided to the Court. The email that is exhibit 1 set out the time and date for the hearing and advised that the hearing would take place in person.
4. A further email was sent to the parties from my associate on 1 December 2025. The email sent on 1 December 2025 has been received into evidence and marked as exhibit 2. Exhibit 2 was sent to the applicant using the same email address that was recorded in his application and his affidavit. Exhibit 2 reminded the parties of the hearing today, confirmed it would take place in person, and put the applicant on notice that if he failed to appear at the hearing, the application may be dismissed pursuant to r 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the GFL Rules.
5. The Minister also relies on an affidavit of service of Aatika Ismailjee, which was filed on 4 December 2025. That affidavit annexes correspondence sent from the Minister's lawyer to the applicant on 18 November 2025. That correspondence reminded the applicant of the hearing listed today and confirmed that he was required to attend the Court on this occasion. The correspondence also put the applicant on notice that if he did not attend the Court on this occasion, the Minister would seek orders from the Court that his matter be dismissed and that he pay the Minister's legal costs of the proceedings.
6. I am satisfied that the documents referred to put the applicant on notice of the hearing today and possible consequences of him failing to appear.
7. The hearing was listed to commence at 2.00pm AWST. At that time, my associate informed me that the applicant was not present in the courtroom and I deferred calling the matter for approximately 15 minutes. When the matter was called at approximately 2.15pm, there was no appearance by or for the applicant. My associate called the matter outside the courtroom three times to confirm that there was still no appearance.
8. There is nothing on the Court file, or otherwise before me today to explain why the applicant is not present at the hearing.
9. In circumstances where the applicant was properly notified of the hearing and, without any apparent reasonable explanation, failed to appear at the hearing, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to dismiss his judicial review application for non-appearance.
10. I note that in circumstances where the Court is making an order to dismiss the application in the absence of the applicant, the applicant may apply to the Court for the orders to be set aside pursuant to r 22.04(2)(a) of the GFL Rules. If the Court were to make such an order, that would have the effect of reinstating the applicant's judicial review application.
11. The Minister seeks an order that the applicant pay his costs fixed in the amount of $6,500. In circumstances where these orders are being made at a final hearing, and having regard to the work required by the Minister in this matter and the amount set out in the scale to the GFL Rules, I am satisfied that the costs order sought by the Minister is appropriate.
12. The Minister also seeks an order that his name be amended to Minister for Immigration and Citizenship. I am satisfied that this is appropriate, having regard to the current title of the Minister.

I certify that the preceding twelve (12) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Ladhams.