Kamran v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 2173

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 typographic, clerical or grammatical errors **(**r 24.04(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth) (Rules), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 24.04 of the Rules.

1. By his application filed 21 January 2021, the applicant seeks judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 18 December 2020 which affirmed a decision of the delegate of the first respondent (Minister) not to grant the applicants' Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas.

1. The background to the application is set out at paragraphs 2 to 9 of the Minister's outline of submissions filed on 22 July 2021, which I adopt for the purpose of these reasons.

1. The proceedings were listed for final hearing on 4 November 2025, at which the applicants made no appearance, nor did anyone appear for them. The Minister seeks that I dismiss the application for non-appearance. The power to do so being located in r 22.04 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth) (Rules).
2. The Minister relies on the affidavit of Mr Matthew Kwong-Yu Wong filed 20 August 2025, the affidavit of Mr Alvin Sharma filed 4 November 2025, a notice of intention to withdraw as lawyer lodged with the registry on 14 August 2025 and accepted for filing on 21 August 2025 and an outline of submissions filed 22 July 2021. The respondent also seeks his costs fixed in the sum of $5,600.

1. As mentioned, on 21 January 2021, the applicant filed an application and an affidavit in support of such application. On 25 January 2021, the Minister filed a response seeking that the application be dismissed with costs.
2. The proceedings came before a registrar on 18 March 2021, at which time orders were made in chambers, with no appearance required by any party.
3. On 26 June 2025, the matter was listed for final hearing before me at 10:15am on 2 September 2025 to be conducted in person. On 27 June 2025, a notice of listing was disseminated from my chambers to the Minister's solicitors and to Mr Benjamin Kramer of Kramer & Kramer Pty Ltd, then acting for the applicants. That notice of listing confirmed the date of 2 September 2025 for final hearing.
4. On 14 August 2025, a notice of intention to withdraw as lawyer was lodged with the registry. That notice of intention to withdraw from Mr Kramer of Kramer & Kramer Pty Ltd informed the applicants that he intended to withdraw as their lawyer and, amongst other things, provided a notice of address for service for the applicants at 76 Blue Gum Road Jesmond, NSW 2299 and an email address of kamran_ijaz@hotmail.com.
5. On 20 August 2025, a notice of listing was sent from my chambers to the Minister's solicitor and to the applicants by post to 76 Blue Gum Road Jesmond, NSW 2016 and by email to kamran_ijaz@hotmail.com. I am satisfied that, notwithstanding the erroneous postcode in that correspondence, the email address was correct as compared to the notice of intention to withdraw. That notice of listing was under cover of an email of the same date emailed to kamran_ijaz@hotmail.com, and stated, amongst other things:

Due to changes in the judicial calendar, the listing on Tuesday, 2 September 2025 at 10:15am is now vacated.

The matter is now listed for a face-to-face hearing before her Honour Judge Eldershaw on Tuesday, 4 November 2025 at 10:15am in Courtroom 9.1 Level 9, 80 William Street, Woolloomooloo NSW 2011.

1. On 21 August 2025, the notice of intention to withdraw was accepted for filing. Mr Wong deposed that on 20 August 2025 he sent an email to the email address benji@kramerandkramer.com.au, being the email address of the applicants' former solicitor who was on the record at that time. Attached to that email, by way of service, were sealed copies of the Minister's response filed 25 January 2021, the courtbook filed 27 April 2021, the outline of submissions filed 22 July 2021, the list of authorities filed 22 July 2021, and the most recent notice of address for service filed by the first respondent on 1 July 2025.
2. Mr Sharma deposed that on 27 October 2025 an email was disseminated from my chambers to the Minister's solicitor and to the applicants at the email address kamran_ijaz@hotmail.com, confirming that the matter was listed for an in-person hearing on 4 November 2025 at 10:15am in Courtroom 9.1 of the William Street Registry of the Court. Mr Sharma deposed that, on 3 November 2025, he sent an email to the applicants at their email address attaching, amongst other documents, sealed copies of the courtbook, outline of submissions and list of authorities. In that same email of 3 November 2025, Mr Sharma notified the applicants that:

If you or your representative do not attend the hearing, we will seek that your Application is dismissed with costs.

1. I am satisfied, in those circumstances, that the applicants are on notice of the hearing and have been served with the application, courtbooks, submissions and other relevant documents, and are aware that their absence may result in the Minister seeking that the application be dismissed with costs.
2. There being no communication with the Court nor any other evidence as to why the applicants are not present at Court today with reasonable excuse, it is appropriate that the proceedings be dismissed for want of appearance, having regard to, amongst other things, the overarching purpose of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia as to the efficient administration of justice according to law. I am satisfied that procedural fairness has been extended to the applicants. I am also satisfied that it is in the interests of the administration of justice that the proceedings be finalised.
3. I am mindful of the fact that the dismissal of the application for want of appearance does not derogate from the applicants' rights pursuant to r 24.04 of the Rules for reinstatement. Were the applicants to seek such reinstatement they would need to satisfy me that such reinstatement was appropriate in all the circumstances.
4. For these reasons, I will dismiss the application for want of appearance.

1. Costs in this jurisdiction follow the event and the Minister has been wholly successful. He has been put to the work of attending Court events, filing material and preparing documents, including a court book. He seeks costs fixed in the sum of $5,600 for costs of and incidental to the proceedings.
2. The current scale of costs for migration matters which proceed to final hearing are set out in the Rules. However, such Rules are prefaced with the words, "The scale applies to work done or services performed on or after 1 September 2025." This raises the question of whether or not work done prior to 1 September 2025 ought be attributed to the scale of costs pursuant to the predecessor Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (2021 Rules), and work done on or after that date by reference to the current Rules. I need not resolve that question because the sum sought by the Minister of $5,600 is below the scale of costs under either set of Rules and is expressed as a lump sum.

I certify that the preceding seventeen (17) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Eldershaw.