2109173 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of China, sought review of the refusal of a protection visa. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was asked to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear the application, which was lodged more than 28 days after the applicant was notified of the original decision. The applicant's agent claimed that notification was not received because their office building had been demolished, and the notification, sent by email, was therefore not received.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed the discretion to extend the time limit for lodging an application for review in these circumstances. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider the effect of the notification being sent by email and the applicant's agent not receiving it due to the demolition of their premises.

The Tribunal found that the relevant legislation did not grant it any discretion to extend the time for lodging an application for review when the application was received outside the prescribed period. The Tribunal applied the principle that jurisdiction is conferred by statute, and in the absence of a statutory provision allowing for an extension of time, the Tribunal could not entertain an application lodged late. The fact that the notification was sent by email and not received by the agent did not create a basis for extending the time limit under the governing legislation.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of the applicant's protection visa application. The application for review was therefore dismissed.