ESCOBAR (Migration)

[2018] AATA 68

ESCOBAR (Migration) [2018] AATA 68 (9 January 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Lalaine ESCOBAR

CASE NUMBER:  1730702

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/803762

MEMBER:Helena Claringbold

DATE:9 January 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 09 January 2018 at 10:56am

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Training (Class GF) visa – Subclass 407 – Invalid application – Lodged out of time – Invited to make a comment – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, s 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 9 August 2017, to refuse to grant a Training (Class GF) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 6 December 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 primary decision by letter dated 9 August 2017 and dispatched by email. On that basis, the 9 August 2017, is the date the applicant is taken to have been notified.  The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. On 14 December 2017, the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant and put to her that it appeared her application was not a valid application as it was not lodged within the relevant time frame.  The review applicant was invited to make comment about the validity of the application for review with comment to be with the Tribunal by 28 December 2017.  At the time of this decision, the applicant had not provided any further information to the Tribunal.

6. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 9 August 2017. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 30 August 2017. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 6 December 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

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

   Helena Claringbold
   Member