2106836 (Refugee)

[2024] AATA 2005

2106836 (Refugee) [2024] AATA 2005 (29 May 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Pranavacharya Prabhakaran

CASE NUMBER:  2106836

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   India

MEMBER:Mia Bailey

DATE:29 May 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.

Statement made on 29 May 2024 at 9:25am

CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – India – applicant left Australia – no response to invitation to comment – not necessary to consider substantive case – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 36(2), 65(1)

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 dependants.

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 4 May 2021 to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). The applicant, who claims to be a citizen of India, applied for the visa on 14 June 2019.

2. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided to affirm the decision under review.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

3. Under s 65(1) of the Act a visa may be granted only if the decision maker is satisfied that the prescribed criteria for the visa have been satisfied.

4. So far as is relevant to this matter, s 36(2) of the Act provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia. This means that a protection visa may only be granted if the applicant is in Australia.

5. Movement records indicate that the applicant is not in Australia. It appears that she left Australia [in] January 2024. On 1 May 2024 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant advising that its records showed that she is not in Australia and therefore could not be granted a protection visa. The applicant was invited to comment on the information by 15 May 2024. The Tribunal has received no response from the applicant to this invitation.

6. The Tribunal is satisfied from the circumstances set out above that the applicant is not in Australia. Therefore, the applicant does not satisfy the requirements of s 36(2) and cannot be granted a protection visa.

7. Having reached this conclusion, it is not necessary to consider the applicant's substantive case for the grant of the visa.

   DECISION

8. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.

   Mia Bailey
   Member