1515218 (Migration)

[2016] AATA 3313

1515218 (Migration) [2016] AATA 3313 (23 February 2016)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REVIEW APPLICANT:  Mr Robert Ayi Mensah

VISA APPLICANT:  Master Robert Ayi Mensah

CASE NUMBER:  1515218

DIBP REFERENCE:  OSF2014/044401

MEMBER:Deborah Morgan

DATE:23 February 2016

PLACE OF DECISION:  Adelaide

DECISION:The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

Statement made on 23 February 2016 at 10:14am

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application has been lodged for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, dated 30 July 2015, to refuse to grant a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 9 November 2015.

3. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

4. Pursuant to s.347(1)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 70 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 30 July 2015 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

6. The Tribunal received a written submission from the review applicant’s representative that section 29(1B)(7) of the Administrative Appeals Act 1975 (the AAT Act) applies in this case and that the Tribunal may extend the time for making an application for review of a decision if the Tribunal is satisfied that is reasonable in all the circumstances.

7. The Tribunal finds that s.29 of the AAT Act does not apply to the Migration Review Division (the MRD)of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal because s.24Z of the AAT Act provides that s.29 of that Act (and most of Part 4 of the AAT Act) does not apply to the MRD of the AAT.

8. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 30 July 2015. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 8 October 2015.

9. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 9 November 2015 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

10. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

    Deborah Morgan
    Member