SZKMQ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 1326

SZKMQ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 1326

The appellant did not appear when the appeal was called, and the Minister's movement records indicated that he had departed Australia on 9 September 2009 while holding a bridging visa; in light of that non-appearance and evidence, the Court was satisfied that the appeal should be dismissed under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for failure of the appellant to attend the hearing of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['failure to Attend Hearing' 'dismissal of Appeal' 'bridging Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Hearing of Appeal

  1. 1 ["Whether the appeal should be dismissed under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for the appellant's failure to attend the hearing of the appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not appear when the appeal was called, and the Minister's movement records indicated that he had departed Australia on 9 September 2009 while holding a bridging visa; in light of that non-appearance and evidence, the Court was satisfied that the appeal should be dismissed under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for failure of the appellant to attend the hearing of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) the appeal be dismissed for the failure of the appellant to attend the hearing of the appeal.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs."]