1810086 (Refugee)

[2018] AATA 2550

1810086 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 2550 (21 May 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1810086

MEMBER:Peter Vlahos

DATE:21 May 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 21 May 2018 at 6:04am

CATCHWORDS
Refugee – Protection Visa – Malaysia – Application lodged out of time – Repeat application – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 29, 338, 347, 411, 412

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.02

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. An application was made to the Tribunal on 11 April 2018 for review. 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 or cancel visas and a range of sponsorship and nomination decisions but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that at the time of the review application had been lodged no relevant decision had been made.

3. On 19 July 2018, the Tribunal (differently constituted) (decision no. 1713476) made a decision to that it did not have jurisdiction to review the decision because the application had been lodged out of time.

4. The applicant subsequently lodged another application for review of the same decision on 11 April 2018 (no. 1810086)). The Tribunal notes that with this decision the applicant had made (in total) two attempts to review a decision that had already been reviewed by this Tribunal.

5. On 2 May 2018 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant[1] inviting her to provide comments as to whether a valid application had been made and those should be submitted to the Tribunal by 16 May 2018.

   [1] AAT File no. 1810086 Folio [12]

6. On 16 May 2018 the applicant wrote to the Tribunal[2] and explained that her problems with her application for review was a result of her seeking and relying upon ‘friends’ in order to prepare and submit her application for review and errors were made which she tried to rectify.  While the Tribunal sympathises with the applicant’s problems concerning the quality of advice and assistance provided to her by her friends, the Tribunal can only emphasise the point, that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure at all times in her dealings with the Department, Tribunal or the Courts as far as it concerns her immigration status is handled by a knowledgeable, competent and at all times responsible registered migration agent. In these circumstances, the Tribunal has no other responsibility except to ensure that every application submitted fulfils the requirements of the Act.

   [2] Ibid see Folio [32]

7. As the delegate’s decision is not reviewable under Parts 5 or 7 of the Act it follows that the application for review was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Peter Vlahos
   Member