SZHSX v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Federal Court of Australia|2008-04-11|Before: Finn J, Cowdroy J

Location: Court Room 21C, Law Courts Building, Queen Square Sydney

4 Attached to the affidavit is a document verifying delivery of the submissions and of the letter dated 14 February 2008. The verification document bears a signature, but the applicant says that such signature is not his own. The Court accordingly infers that the signature is that of the person who made the delivery. The map attached to the letter dated 14 February 2008 clearly shows the location of the Law Courts Building in Queens Square. 5 The second affidavit of Alison Lena Faron sworn on 27 February attaches a letter addressed to the applicant dated 20 February 2008 advising that judgment will be delivered on 21 February 2008. The letter was forwarded by courier to the applicant's provided address at 5/351 Beamish Street, Campsie, New South Wales. 6 In the absence of the applicant Finn J could have dismissed the appeal for want of appearance. Instead, his Honour proceeded to determine the appeal on its substantive merits pursuant to O 52 r 38A(1)(d) of the Federal Court Rules (Cth)('the Rules'). 7 The applicant's notice of appeal raised three grounds for determination by Finn J, namely:

The Tribunal had bias against me and misunderstood my claims.
The Tribunal is not satisfied with my fear of Convention-based persecution is well founded. The conclusion is not supported with evidence, and rational and logical foundation. The Tribunal misunderstood my claims and believed that my claims were not Convention-related.

13 Prashar was applied in MZWOG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1843 and S353 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2007] FCAFC 13. 14 The applicant in the current proceedings says that he went to the wrong court. When questioned today he said he went to court 21C at Goulburn Street. The Federal Magistrates Court is located at John Maddison Tower, 88 Goulburn Street, Sydney. The applicant says he went there because he had been there before. He says he arrived there at 9.00 am and by 11.00 am he had realised he was in the wrong court. He says that he telephoned a friend and that such contact was made at midday. This friend spoke English. No satisfactory explanation has been given to the Court why the applicant did not then attend at this Court or to make any inquiries of his appeal. Nor is there any explanation why he did not follow the instructions in the letters of the Registrar and the first respondent's solicitor indicating the time, date and place for hearing. 15 The Court also considers the merits of the applicant's claim. It is apparent that Finn J thoroughly considered each of the applicant's claims. The careful reasons of his Honour show that he provided the applicant with a hearing of his appeal, despite the applicant's absence. The applicant has not suggested that there is other material he wishes to put before the Court, he has filed no submissions, and he does not suggest that Finn J was in error. 16 In light of the above, the Court is of the opinion that the grounds stated in the applicant's Notice of Appeal could not succeed. In these circumstances the Court declines to exercise its discretion to set aside the orders of Finn J. Accordingly the applicant's application is dismissed with costs. I certify that the preceding sixteen (16) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Cowdroy.

Associate: Dated: 11 April 2008 Counsel for the Applicant: Applicant appeared in person

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (4 paragraphs)

Parties

Cases Cited (3)