2211513 (Refugee)

[2022] AATA 4781

2211513 (Refugee) [2022] AATA 4781 (23 November 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  2211513

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   Indonesia

MEMBER:L. Symons

DATE:23 November 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 23 November 2022 at 10:18am

CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Indonesia – application for review made more than 28 days after department’s decision notification – COVID restrictions, mother’s health and applicant’s work – no discretion to extend time – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 4.31(2)

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 of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 24 June 2021 to refuse to grant a protection visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the Department of Home Affairs notified the applicant of the decision by letter dated 24 June 2021 and dispatched by email on that date. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

3. As the applicant was not in immigration detention on the day the applicant was notified of the decision, an application for review of the decision had to be made within 28 days, commencing on that day: reg 4.31(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 9 August 2022.

4. On 19 September 2022, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant inviting him to make comments in writing by 4 October 2022 on whether a valid application for review had been made. This letter was sent to him by email on 19 September 2022.

5. On 1 October 2022, the Tribunal received a response from the applicant’s authorised representative indicating that the applicant was aware that his application for review was lodged after the due date. The reason was because he had family issues and due to Covid-19 he was out of time. In his response, the applicant stated that between June 2021 and November 2021 his mother was ill with cholesterol and high blood pressure and was hospitalised. He forced himself to work non-stop so he was able to pay for his mother’s hospital fees. As a result he had limited time in which to lodge an application for review.

6. The Tribunal has considered the applicant’s submission but does not have the discretion to extend the prescribed time for filing an application for review. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 24 June 2021. Therefore, the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 21 July 2021.

7. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 9 August 2022, the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   decision

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

   L. Symons
   Member