Bae (Migration)

[2016] AATA 4973

Bae (Migration) [2016] AATA 4973 (27 June 2016)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Ms Kot Na Rae Bae
Mr Jaeyong Lee  

CASE NUMBER:  1509310

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2015/895085

MEMBER:Bruce MacCarthy

DATE:27 June 2016

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 27 June 2016 at 8:01am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) – Subclass 572 (Vocational Education and Training Sector) – application dismissed – failure to attend hearing – no request for reinstatement – decision affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 363B, 362C

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 3 July 2015 to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 572 Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. On 9 June 2016, the Tribunal dismissed the application under s.362B(1A)(b) of the Act as the review applicants did not appear before it to give evidence and present arguments 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 and the reasons for the decision, in accordance with s.362C(5). The review applicants were advised that reinstatement of the application could be sought within 14 days of receiving the dismissal statement and that a failure to apply for reinstatement within the 14 day period would result in confirmation of the dismissal decision.

4. On 9 June 2016, the Tribunal received an email message from the first named applicant saying that she had received the notice of dismissal but had already returned to her home country, Korea.  Her message was unclear, but it appeared she was seeking advice about her options.  An officer of the Tribunal responded to her on 16 June 2016, saying that it was not clear whether she was requesting reinstatement of her application and that, if she did wish the case to be reinstated she should state this explicitly.  She was advised that, if the Tribunal did not receive any further response by 23 June 2016, it would proceed to make its decision.  The applicant has not contacted the Tribunal since then.  In particular, there has been no request for reinstatement.

5. As the review applicants did not apply for reinstatement of the application within the 14 days period, the Tribunal must confirm the decision to dismiss the application.  In these circumstances, the decisions under review are taken to be affirmed.

   DECISION

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

   Bruce MacCarthy
   

   Member