1732444 (Refugee)

[2018] AATA 153

1732444 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 153 (12 January 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1732444

MEMBER:Ms Christine Long

DATE:12 January 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 12 January 2018 at 4:46pm

CATCHWORDS

Refugee – Protection visa – Malaysia – Repeat application – Decision already subject of valid review - Non reviewable decision - No jurisdiction to review decision twice

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, s 65

Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2

CASES

Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301

SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771

SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration [in] May 2017 to refuse to grant a protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 21 December 2017. Although that application notes that the date of decision to be reviewed is 12 December 2016, according to Tribunal records the only decision that the applicant has had refused by a delegate of the Minister is a protection visa application refused [in] May 2017 which has previously been reviewed by the Tribunal and affirmed on 20 October 2017. A subsequent application for review of the same delegate’s decision was made to the Tribunal [in] October 2017 and the Tribunal decided on 12 December 2017 that it had no jurisdiction in the matter because the delegate’s decision had already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal.

3. For the following reasons, the Tribunal finds that it has no jurisdiction to review the delegate’s decision. An application for review of the same delegate’s decision was previously made to the Tribunal. As noted above the Tribunal made a decision on that application on 20 October 2017. Where the Tribunal has received a valid application for review of a reviewable decision and carried out its statutory duty to review the decision under the Act, the decision is no longer a reviewable decision: SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164 at [41] and the cases cited therein. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review a delegate’s decision twice: Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301 and SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771.

4. As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision. Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.

   DECISION

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

   Ms Christine Long
   Member