2015699 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, sought review of a decision to refuse to grant a protection visa. The application for review was lodged out of time, and the central issue before the court was whether the applicant had been validly notified of the decision under the relevant statutory provisions, which would determine whether the court had jurisdiction to hear the out-of-time application.

The primary legal issue was whether the notification of the decision to refuse the protection visa was effected in accordance with the requirements of section 5 of the *Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977* (Cth) and the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant's claim of being unable to access emails at the time of notification constituted a valid reason for the delay in lodging the application for review, and if the notification itself was sufficient to commence the time limit for review.

The court found that the notification of the decision was sent to the applicant's nominated email address, which was a method of notification permitted by the *Migration Act*. The applicant's inability to access emails at that specific time did not invalidate the notification itself, nor did it automatically extend the time for lodging an application for review. The court applied the principle that statutory notification requirements must be met, and the applicant bore the onus of demonstrating that the notification was not effected in accordance with the law or that there were exceptional circumstances justifying an out-of-time application. As the notification was deemed validly effected, the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the application for review.

Consequently, the court dismissed the application for review for want of jurisdiction.