1801677 (Refugee)

[2018] AATA 565

1801677 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 565 (22 February 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1801677

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                  Malaysia

MEMBER:James Silva

DATE:22 February 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 22 February 2018 at 8:49am

CATCHWORDS

Refugee – Protection visa – Malaysia – No jurisdiction – Application not valid – Not lodged within prescribed period

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.31(2)

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependant.

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] November 2017 to refuse to grant a protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 22 January 2018. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. The applicant wrote in his on-line review application form that he was seeking review of a decision to refuse to grant him a bridging visa. Department records indicate that the visa he was refused [in] November 2017 was a protection visa, and not a bridging visa. A Tribunal officer contacted the applicant by telephone on 30 January 2018, and he confirmed that he had meant to seek review of a protection visa refusal.

3. As the applicant was not in immigration detention on the day he was notified of the decision, an application for review of the decision had to be made within 28 days, commencing on that day: r.4.31(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994. Therefore the prescribed period to apply for review ended on [a date in] December 2017.

4. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 2 February 2018, advising of its preliminary view that his application was not valid, as it was not lodged within the prescribed period. The Tribunal received no response to this letter.

5. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 22 January 2018 the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   James Silva
   Member