1917713 (Refugee)

[2019] AATA 6726

1917713 (Refugee) [2019] AATA 6726 (5 December 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1917713

MEMBER:Luke Hardy

DATE:5 December 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 05 December 2019 at 2:11pm

CATCHWORDS

REFUGEE – protection visa – Malaysia – review previously completed – no reviewable decision – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, s 29
Migration Act 1958, ss 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 3 July 2019 for review of a 25 October 2018 protection visa refusal. 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 visas of various kinds, but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that a review of the 25 October 2018 decision has been made and finalised; ref. AAT MRD file number 1833498.

3. On 1 October 2019, the Tribunal wrote to the applicants by email to advise of the jurisdictional issue, inviting them to comment by 15 October 2019 on whether a valid visa application had been made. The Tribunal did not receive a response within the period provided, but on 2 November 2019, the applicants submitted formal notice of withdrawal of their purported review application of 3 July 2019, saying they were preparing to return to their country of nationality, Malaysia.

4. On the evidence before me, the 3 July 2019 “review application” was not a validly made application and, accordingly, there is no valid application from which to withdraw. 

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.

   Luke Hardy
   Member