1619562 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for review concerning a protection visa. The applicants, who were seeking protection in Australia, failed to appear at the hearing of their application. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed their application. Subsequently, the third applicant sought to have the application reinstated, attributing their non-appearance to an email from the Tribunal being mistakenly directed to their junk email folder, and also citing difficulties in finding accommodation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether, in light of the circumstances presented by the third applicant, it was appropriate to reinstate the dismissed application for review. This required the Tribunal to consider the applicant's explanation for their failure to attend the hearing and the onus that rests upon an applicant to ensure they receive and respond to correspondence from the Tribunal.

The Tribunal reasoned that the onus is on the applicant to check for correspondence from the Tribunal, including ensuring that emails are not filtered into junk folders. The Tribunal noted that the co-applicant parents of the third applicant had already departed Australia, which further weighed against reinstatement. Given these factors, the Tribunal was not satisfied that reinstatement was the appropriate course of action.

Accordingly, the Tribunal confirmed its earlier decision to dismiss the application for review.