1814628 (Refugee)

[2018] AATA 2778

1814628 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 2778 (18 June 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1814628

MEMBER:Joseph Lindsay

DATE:18 June 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 18 June 2018 at 10:31am

CATCHWORDS
Refugee – Protection Visa – Malaysia– Repeat application – Non-reviewable decision – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65

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 the second application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 20 March 2017 to refuse to grant a protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). This most recent review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 20 May 2018. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. The applicant’s first application to the Tribunal to review this decision was received on 27 March 2017. On 3 May 2018 (oral decision) and as confirmed on 4 May 2018 (written decision) the Tribunal affirmed the delegate’s decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa (case number 1706078). The applicant was notified of this decision on 3 May 2018 (oral decision) and on 4 May 2018 (written decision).

3. This brings the Tribunal to the current application from the applicant to review a non-reviewable decision. As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision.

4. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 29 May 2018 to advise him that his application for review was not valid and sought comment from the applicant. To date there has been no response from the applicant. There is no apparent reason as to why the applicant has made a further application to the Tribunal given the circumstances as he has been advised.

5. If the Tribunal receives any further documentation that appears to seek review of the same delegate’s decision, it will not treat it as a new application for review. It will not allocate a new case number, or ask the applicant to comment on the validity of any purported review application, or make a further decision about whether it has jurisdiction to review that decision. The Tribunal will instead advise the applicant that the Tribunal cannot consider this case further.

6. 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

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

   Joseph Lindsay
   Member