SZTGE v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 1205

SZTGE v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 1205

In light of the appellant's non-appearance, despite being properly notified of the hearing and reasonable efforts to locate her, the Court exercised its power under rule 36.75 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 to dismiss the appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal (dismissal for Non Appearance)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for non-appearance of appellant. Appellant to pay respondents' costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'appeals Procedure' 'dismissal for Non Appearance']
['immigration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'appeals Procedure' 'dismissal for Non Appearance']

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 / Judgment on Appeal (dismissal for Non Appearance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the appellant's non-appearance" 'Adequacy of notification of hearing to the appellant']

Ratio Decidendi

In light of the appellant's non-appearance, despite being properly notified of the hearing and reasonable efforts to locate her, the Court exercised its power under rule 36.75 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 to dismiss the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for non-appearance of appellant. Appellant to pay respondents' costs.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to rule 36.75 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 the appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondents' costs."]