2201826 (Refugee)

[2022] AATA 2348

2201826 (Refugee) [2022] AATA 2348 (28 May 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  2201826

MEMBER:Kira Raif

DATE:28 May 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 28 May 2022 at 7:21am

CATCHWORDS

REFUGEE – protection visa – Myanmar – no relevant decision – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

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 10 February 2022 for review of a purported decision to refuse to grant her the visa. 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 (Cth) (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 (Cth). Sections 338 and 411 of the Act and reg 4.02(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) set out the range of decisions that are reviewable in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Tribunal. They include decisions to refuse and cancel visas of various kinds and a range of sponsorship and nomination decisions, but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that at the time the review application was lodged, no relevant decision had been made.

3. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 11 April 2022 seeking her comments on the information that may indicate that there was no decision made in relation to her visa applicant. The applicant did not provide any substantive comments on the above information.

4. As no reviewable decision had been made at the time the review application was lodged it follows that the application was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Kira Raif
   Senior Member