RCLN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FCAFC 113

I certify that the preceding thirty-four (34) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justices Perry, Sarah C Derrington and Abraham.

Federal Court of Australia (Full Court)|2025-08-26|Before: Abraham JJ

For the reasons set out above, the appeal must be dismissed. As the Minister has been wholly successful in resisting the appeal, the appellant is to pay the Minister's costs as agreed or assessed, subject to one caveat. The appeal was originally listed for hearing at 10:15am on 19 August 2025. When the Court was advised that the appellant was not present and the Minister advised that that may have been because the appellant was in prison, the hearing was delayed while enquiries were made to locate the appellant. Once the Minister identified the place where the appellant was being held in custody, orders were made in Chambers under s 77(1) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), for the appellant to be produced to the Court by audiovisual link later that morning. That order was accompanied by a non-publication order made pursuant to s 37AI of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) with respect to the appellant's name in order to protect his identity, consistently with the non-publication of his name otherwise in connection with the proceeding. The Minister appropriately accepted that he had been aware that the appellant may have been in prison some time prior to the hearing and that this was a matter which could have been brought to the Court's attention in advance of the hearing and could have been the subject of inquiry by the Minister prior to the hearing. The failure to do so resulted in wasted time and costs. As such, the Minister again appropriately did not contend that he should receive costs occasioned by reason of the delay in commencing the hearing of the appeal on 19 August 2025, in the event that he was successful in the appeal, as has been the case.

I certify that the preceding thirty-four (34) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justices Perry, Sarah C Derrington and Abraham.

Court of Australia Act 1976

Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Act 2023

(Administration of Sentences) Act 1999

Craig v South Australia [1995] HCA 58; (1995) 184 CLR 163

Fang Wang v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1044

Minister for Home Affairs v Ogawa [2019] FCAFC 98; (2019) 269 FCR 536

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Rajalingam [1999] FCA 719; (1999) 93 FCR 220

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30; (2001) 206 CLR 323

Pearson v Commonwealth [2024] HCA 46; (2024) 99 ALJR 110

Pearson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FCAFC 203; (2022) 295 FCR 177

Plaintiff M64/2015 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] HCA 50; (2015) 258 CLR 173

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; ex parte Applicant S20/2002 [2003] HCA 30; (2003) 77 ALJR 1165

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (2 paragraphs)

Parties

Legislation Cited (4)

Cases Cited (19)