1813503 (Refugee)

[2018] AATA 2775

1813503 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 2775 (25 June 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1813503

MEMBER:Rodger Shanahan

DATE:25 June 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 25 June 2018 at 10:55am

CATCHWORDS
Refugee – Protection visa – Malaysia – Tribunal has reviewed the applicant’s case – No reviewable decision – Decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 s 29
Migration Act 1958, ss 347, 338, 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 10 May 2018 for review of a negative decision regarding a protection visa application of the applicant. 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.

3. They include decisions to refuse visas of various kinds, but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that the Tribunal has already made a finding with respect to the delegate’s decision, and hence that decision has already been the subject of a review..

4. No response was received to the natural justice letter sent to the applicant. 

5. As there is no reviewable decision it follows that the application for review was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Rodger Shanahan
   Member