Buy18 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, a citizen of China, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) which affirmed the refusal of his Protection visa application. The applicant had claimed he would face persecution in China due to his Falun Gong practice. The delegate of the Minister for Immigration refused the visa, finding insufficient evidence of persecution or harm. The applicant then applied to the Tribunal for review, providing an email address for correspondence. The Tribunal sent a letter to this nominated email address inviting comment on the validity of the application for review, to which the applicant did not respond. Subsequently, the Tribunal notified the applicant of its decision affirming the delegate's refusal.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Court was whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the applicant's appeal. This turned on whether the applicant had lodged his application for review within the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal had determined that the application was lodged after the expiry of the time limit, and therefore it lacked jurisdiction. The applicant's failure to respond to the Tribunal's communication sent to his nominated email address was a significant factor in the Tribunal's determination.

Emmett J reasoned that the Tribunal's finding of a lack of jurisdiction was based on its factual determination that the application for review was lodged out of time. The Tribunal had correctly identified the deadline for lodging the application and had found that the applicant's submission on 2 January 2018 was after this date. The Tribunal had also noted that the applicant had failed to respond to its communication sent to his nominated email address, which was the point of contact he had provided. The Court found no error in the Tribunal's approach to determining its jurisdiction based on the timeliness of the application.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.