Wei v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FedCFamC2G 464

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 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

1. This matter was listed for a final hearing before the Court in person at 10:15am on 18 March 2025. When the matter was called, there was no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant.
2. In the circumstances, the Court made the following orders:
   1. The application seeking judicial review filed on 14 May 2019 is dismissed pursuant to rule 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Rules) 2021 (Cth) (Rules).

2. The Applicant pay the First Respondent's costs fixed in the sum $5,400.

1. The following notation was made to the orders:
   1. Pursuant to rule 17.05(2)(a) of the Rules the Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order that was made in the absence of a party.
2. These brief reasons explain why the Court dismissed the matter for non-appearance pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (Rules).

1. The application before the Court today, brought by the applicant, Mr Low Tian Wei, is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) made on 2 May 2019. By that decision, the Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the first respondent (Minister) to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa to the applicant, under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
2. The applicant filed an application for judicial review on 14 May 2019, containing three grounds of review (application). It is not necessary to deal with those grounds in the current circumstances.
3. At the commencement of the proceeding this morning, which was listed for 10:15am, but was delayed until approximately 10:35am, there was no appearance by the applicant. I asked for the matter to be called three times outside of the courtroom. My associate called the name of the applicant in the vicinity of the courtroom, and I was subsequently informed that there was no appearance.
4. The time is now 10:52am, and I note that there is still no appearance for the applicant.
5. The Minister seeks an order pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Rules for the matter to be dismissed by reason of the applicant's non-appearance.
6. I am satisfied on the information that has been provided to me, both from my own chambers and also from Ms Chan, who appears on behalf of the Minister, that the applicant was properly put on notice of this hearing, and that the applicant has not in any way endeavoured to inform the Court or the parties of his non-attendance or any reasons therefore.
7. I am satisfied, from submissions made by Ms Chan, that the last occasion on which the applicant appeared before this Court in relation to the application was at a call-over before a judicial registrar. I am also satisfied that the applicant was aware of the date and time for his judicial review hearing. Ms Chan informed the Court that emails had been sent to the applicant's nominated email address by the Minister's solicitors, including on 4 March this year, which included a copy of the Minister's submissions, and again last night. On both of those occasions, the email from the Minister's solicitors put the applicant on notice as to the date and time for hearing, and also squarely informed the applicant of the potential consequences of his non-appearance, including that an application may be made for the application to be dismissed, and that costs be ordered against him.
8. The Court also sent the applicant an email to his nominated address on 29 January 2025, identifying the date and the time for the hearing, including informing him that the hearing would be conducted in person. My chambers also informed the applicant on 11 March 2025 of the hearing, including the precise courtroom in which the matter would be heard.
9. Acting as a model litigant, Ms Chan informed the Court this morning that there was an alternative means of communication, being a mobile phone number for the applicant. An attempt was made by my associate to contact the applicant at that mobile phone number, but there was no response.
10. I am satisfied, in all the circumstances, that the applicant was on notice, by way of emails sent to his nominated email address for service, as to the hearing, and also that he was on notice as to the consequences of his failure to attend.
11. In all the circumstances, I am prepared to dismiss the proceedings consequent upon the non-attendance of the applicant.

I certify that the preceding fifteen (15) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Forbes.