Campbell (Migration)

[2017] AATA 1933

Campbell (Migration) [2017] AATA 1933 (11 September 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Gordon Campbell

CASE NUMBER:  1719076

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/24394 PNJ

MEMBER:Nicola Findson

DATE:11 September 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Perth

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

Statement made on 11 September 2017 at 10:51am

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) – Subclass 187 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme – Review application out of time

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347(1)(b), 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 10 July 2017, to refuse to grant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 23 August 2017. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. 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.

4. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 10 July 2017 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. On 31 August 2017, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant and invited him to comment as to whether he had made a valid application for review by 14 September 2017.  The Tribunal sent that letter to the applicant via the email address nominated by him in his review application.  The relevant part of the letter stated:

   I am of the view that your application is not a valid application as it was not lodged within the

   relevant time limit. The time limit is 21 days from the day on which you are taken to have

   been notified of the primary decision. The primary decision was emailed to you / your authorised representative on 10 July 2017 and, on the basis that 10 July 2017 was the date on which you are taken to have been notified, the last day for lodging the application for review was 31 July 2017. As the          application was not received until 23 August 2017, it appears to be out of time.  However, this is a matter which must be determined by a Member.

6. By email dated 31 August 2017, in response to the invitation to comment on this information, the applicant indicated to the Tribunal that on the basis of advice received from a migration agent he understood his application was not valid.  He also informed the Tribunal that he was currently arranging to leave the country in order to apply for a new visa.

7. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 10 July 2017. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 31 July 2017. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 23 August 2017 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

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

   Nicola Findson
   Member