2421223 (Refugee)

[2025] ARTA 2086

2421223 (REFUGEE) [2025] ARTA 2086 (25 SEPTEMBER 2025)

DECISION AND  

REASONS FOR DECISION

Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Tribunal Number:  2421223

Tribunal:Clyde Cosentino

Place:Brisbane

Date:  25 September 2025

Decision:The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.

Statement made on 25 September 2025 at 9:12am

CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Vietnam – no appearance at hearing – application for review dismissed – application for reinstatement – rescheduling of hearing sought – no further information or supporting evidence provided – progress of application and opportunities to engage in process – no adequate explanation – dismissal confirmed – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 368B(5)
Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth), s 99

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 369 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of decisions made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 19 June 2024 to refuse to grant the visa applicants Protection (Class XA) Subclass 866 visas under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. On 8 September 2025, the Tribunal dismissed the application under s 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) as the review applicants did not appear before it at the time and date of the scheduled hearing.

3. The review applicants were notified of the dismissal decision and given a copy of a written statement setting out the decision, in accordance with s 368B(5). The review applicants were advised that reinstatement of the application could be sought within 28 days of receiving the dismissal statement and that a failure to apply for reinstatement within the 28 days period would result in confirmation of the dismissal decision.  The review applicants were advised that if they applied for reinstatement, they should set out why they failed to appear at the hearing and provide any other information they wanted the Tribunal to take into consideration when deciding whether their reinstatement application should be granted.

4. On 9 September 2025, the review applicants emailed a completed Response to Hearing Notice form with an excerpt under the heading “Part 2 – Participating in the hearing” seeking reinstatement as follows:

   “Pleading for re-schedule of my case due to unable to arrange of timeframe and considering … re-instatement by phone/video link please…”

5. The review applicants applied for reinstatement of the application within 28 days after receiving notice of the decision. The Tribunal has considered the information provided in the reinstatement application and other relevant matters as outlined below. For the following reasons, the Tribunal does not consider it appropriate to reinstate the application.

6. The review applicants’ reasons for failing to appear at the scheduled Tribunal hearing, and any other information they wished the Tribunal to consider, are that they sought a reschedule of their hearing due to their unable to “arrange of timeframe” and considering a reinstatement by phone or video link.  These are the only reasons provided by the review applicants and this is all the information provided to the Tribunal to consider.  The review applicants were advised in the hearing invitation that the hearing was an opportunity for them to present further information regarding their claims and that if they did not attend the hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the application for review without any further consideration of the application or the information before it.

7. The review applicants have not provided any evidence or information as to why not being able to “arrange … timeframe” prevented them from appearing at the scheduled Tribunal hearing. The review applicants have not provided any evidence or information as to why they want the Tribunal to consider reinstatement by phone or video link.  The review applicants have not provided any other information in support of their reinstatement application. Based on the available information, they Tribunal does not consider that the review applicants have provided a reasonable or acceptable explanation for their failure to attend the hearing.

8. The Tribunal has also considered the review applicants’ conduct generally in progressing their review application. Since lodgement of the review applicants’ application for review at this Tribunal where they provided their authorised email address for communication, the Tribunal has reached out to the review applicants by email on 15 July 2024 (“Acknowledgement of Application” which included a request that the review applicants tell the Tribunal immediately if there were any change of contact details and/or change of personal circumstances that were relevant to the review); by email on 20 February 2025 (indicating that the file was being prepared for a Tribunal Member and that the review applicants were invited to complete a pre-hearing information form); and by email on 20 August 2025 (“Notice of Hearing” invitation which informed the review applicants to “Please use the ‘Response to hearing notice’ form attached to this letter or attach additional information if you have any requests or any new information which you wish us to consider”). In each of these instances, the review applicants have not communicated or engaged with the Tribunal and have not made any attempt to progress their application for review. The review applicants did not respond to the two SMS reminders about the hearing 5 business days and one business day before the scheduled hearing.

9. The Tribunal acknowledges the review applicants’ request seeking a rescheduling of their hearing and for the Tribunal to consider “re-instatement by phone/video link.”  However, as outlined above, the review applicants have been given several opportunities to present their case and to engage with the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal is not satisfied that they have provided an adequate explanation for their non-appearance before the Tribunal. 

10. The decision to dismiss the application is confirmed. In these circumstances, the decisions under review are taken to be affirmed.

    DECISION

11. The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.