Alodia International Pty Ltd (Migration)

[2018] AATA 2823

Alodia International Pty Ltd (Migration) [2018] AATA 2823 (11 June 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Alodia International Pty Ltd

CASE NUMBER:  1809441

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/2040587

MEMBER:Bridget Cullen

DATE:11 June 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

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

Statement made on 11 June 2018 at 4:05pm

CATCHWORDS
Migration – Business Sponsorship – Review application out of time – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 347, 494C
Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.10

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application has been lodged for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, dated 5 March 2018, refusing a Business Sponsorship application under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 5 April 2018. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. Pursuant to s.347(1)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 21 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

3. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 5 March 2018 and dispatched by post. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 8 May 2018 indicating, based on the manner on which the refusal decision was sent, that the applicant was taken to have received the notification on 14 March 2018. It was indicated that, based on Regulations the applicant had until 4 April 2018 to lodge the application for review. On the basis that the application was not received until 5 April 2018, the preliminary view of the Tribunal was that it had been lodged out of time. The applicant was given the opportunity to respond to this preliminary view of the Tribunal.

5. The applicant responded by email on 25 May 2018 indicating that it had been endeavouring to obtain some supporting documents which had taken longer than expected, and further that its office was closed on two public holiday dates following the time it was notified of the refusal.  The applicant did not account for the public holiday dates in counting the timeframe for application for review.

6. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

7. The Tribunal regrets that the applicant misunderstood the timeframes applicable.  Nevertheless, the obligation to lodge the application for review within the required timeframe is absolute, and the Tribunal has no discretion to vary the time limits.

8. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 14 March 2018: s.494C of the Act. Therefore, the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 4 April 2018.

9. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 5 April 2018 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

    Bridget Cullen
    Member