DAP16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 755

DAP16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 755

The appeal was dismissed under r 36.75(1)(a)(i) because the appellant failed to attend when the appeal was called on, despite being notified of the hearing and of the risk of dismissal, did not file written submissions as ordered, could not be contacted, and the grounds of appeal were general, unelaborated, and in relation to the second ground appeared to require leave and lacked apparent merit.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision / Hearing of Appeal; Appellant Did Not Appear; Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed pursuant to r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
Legal Topics
['non Appearance by Appellant' 'dismissal of Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'natural Justice and Procedural Fairness' 'complementary Protection']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['non Appearance by Appellant' 'dismissal of Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'natural Justice and Procedural Fairness' 'complementary Protection']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision / Hearing of Appeal; Appellant Did Not Appear; Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal should be dismissed under r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) because the appellant was absent when the appeal was called on for hearing.' 'Whether the primary judge erred in failing to find that the Tribunal member denied the appellant natural justice and procedural fairness.' "Whether the primary judge erred in failing to find that the Tribunal and the Department should have considered the appellant's case on complementary grounds."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed under r 36.75(1)(a)(i) because the appellant failed to attend when the appeal was called on, despite being notified of the hearing and of the risk of dismissal, did not file written submissions as ordered, could not be contacted, and the grounds of appeal were general, unelaborated, and in relation to the second ground appeared to require leave and lacked apparent merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed pursuant to r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed pursuant to r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]