1721560 (Refugee)

[2017] AATA 1978

1721560 (Refugee) [2017] AATA 1978 (11 October 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1721560

MEMBER:Nicole Burns

DATE:11 October 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 11 October 2017 at 11:49am

CATCHWORDS

Refugee – Protection Visa – Malaysia – No relevant decision – No grounds for review

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 338, 347, 411, 412

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.02

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application was made to the Tribunal on 13 September 2017.  For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction in respect of this application.

2. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review a decision under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) if an application is properly made under s.347 or s.412 of that Act, or in limited circumstances not relevant to this application, s.29 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. Sections 338 and 411 of the Act and r.4.02(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 set out the range of decisions that are reviewable in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Tribunal. They include decisions to refuse and cancel visas of various kinds and a range of sponsorship and nomination decisions, but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that at the time the review application was lodged, no relevant decision had been made.

3. On 20 September 2017 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant inviting his comment on its preliminary view that his review application was not valid because there had not been a decision to refuse or cancel a visa, and whilst the Department of Immigration and Border Protection had assessed that his protection visa application was invalid, the Tribunal cannot review that decision.  No response was received.  

4. As no reviewable decision had been made at the time the review application was lodged it follows that the application was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Nicole Burns
   Member