SZFJZ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2006] FCAFC 95

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZFJZ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCAFC 95

SZFJZ AND ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

NSD 33 OF 2006

TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ
22 MAY 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 33 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZFJZ AND ORS APPELLANTS
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGES:	TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	22 MAY 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 33 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZFJZ AND ORS APPELLANTS
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ
DATE:	22 MAY 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. In this matter, the appellants have failed to appear at the hearing before the Court.  We note that the last address for service is stated on the Notice of Appeal and also on an affidavit in support of the Notice of Appeal. Both documents were both filed on 6 January 2006 and include an address in Pyrmont and also a mobile telephone number. 

2. An additional affidavit by Mr Edmund Teng was filed on 4 April 2006 and states that Mr Teng ceased to act for the appellants on 14 March 2006. Attached to that affidavit are two letters.  The first is a letter of 24 February 2006 from Mr Teng to the male appellant, confirming that Mr Teng’s firm would file a Notice of Ceasing to Act in the proceedings after seven days of the appellant receiving the letter. The letter advised the appellant that if he did not appoint another solicitor or file and serve a notice of address for service within seven days, he may not be served with documents related to the proceedings.

3. On 14 March 2006, Mr Teng wrote to the appellants stating that he enclosed a copy of a letter from Federal Court of Australia dated 7 March 2006 that concerned the hearing date of the appeal. This letter of 7 March 2006 from the Federal Court simply stated that it was anticipated the Federal Court would hear the appeal in Sydney during the sitting period 1-26 May 2006 unless the appellants were advised the appeal would be heard on an earlier date. Mr Teng’s letter of 14 March 2006 also stated: "Please note we will be filing the notice of ceasing to act shortly." 

4. When there was no appearance from the appellants this morning, the telephone number given on the Notice of Appeal was called and it was indicated by the person receiving the call that he was unable to contact the appellant today. In these circumstances, and having regard to the correspondence before us, the problems which have arisen in relation to the non-appearance lie at the door of the appellants. 

5. Accordingly, since there has been no appearance on the appeal, the Court dismisses the appeal for default of appearance and orders that the appellants should pay the costs of the respondent. We direct the Minister to notify the appellants of the orders which have been made today, and also to send a copy of the transcript to the appellants at the address on the Notice of Appeal.  The Court also directs the Minister to check the telephone number provided once again to ensure it is correct. Finally, the Court refers to the provision that enables a fresh application to be made to the Court and points out that there is power for the matter come back before the Court in certain circumstances if such an application is made.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Court.

Associate:

Dated:            6 July 2006

No appearance for the Appellant.
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms R Pepper
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Blake Dawson Waldron
Date of Hearing:	22 May 2006
Date of Judgment:	22 May 2006