Caldwell (Migration)

[2019] AATA 2573

Caldwell (Migration) [2019] AATA 2573 (11 July 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REVIEW APPLICANT:  Mr David Robert Caldwell

VISA APPLICANT:  Mrs Linda del Prado Gil

CASE NUMBER:  1906265

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2019/510295

MEMBER:Sean Baker

DATE:11 July 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 11 July 2019 at 10:12am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Visitor (Class FA) visa – Subclass 600 (Visitor) – standing to apply for review – relative of visa applicant – son-in-law – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 338, 347

CASES
DFQ17 v MIBP [2019] FCAFC 64

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 25 February 2019, to refuse to grant a Visitor (Class FA) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). This decision is reviewable under s.338(7) of the Act.

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 17 March 2019. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. Section 347(2) of the Act specifies who has the right to apply for review of a decision that is reviewable under Part 5 of the Act. In the case of a decision described in s.338(7), an application for review may only be made by the relative referred to in the subsection concerned: s.347(2)(c).

4. The Tribunal wrote to the review applicant, explaining the above. The review applicant responded and acknowledged that it appeared he did not have standing to seek review.

5. The Tribunal acknowledges that this case has been impacted by the decision of DFQ17 v MIBP [2019] FCAFC 64 and the case has not been finalised quickly as a result. The Tribunal regrets any impact this may have had on the review applicant and his family.

6. As the decision that is the subject of the review application is a decision covered by s.338(7), the application for review could only be made by the relative referred to in that subsection. In the present case, the review application was made by the son-in-law of the visa applicant. As such, the application for review is not an application properly made under s.347 and it follows that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Sean Baker
   Member