Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd (Migration)

[2022] AATA 2699

Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd (Migration) [2022] AATA 2699 (10 February 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Kai Wang (MARN: 0850895)

CASE NUMBER:  1924714

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2017/4752190

MEMBER:Namoi Dougall

DATE:10 February 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 10 February 2022 at 7:07pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – nomination of a position – applicant business deregistered – no standing to continue with application for review – no legal entity – no jurisdiction        

LEGISLATION

Corporations Act 2001, s 601
Migration Act 1958
Migration Regulations 1994

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 Home Affairs on 21 August 2019 made by Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd. For the following reasons, the Tribunal finds that it does not have jurisdiction.

2. Information from the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) register shows that Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd was deregistered on 14 November 2021. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that the company’s registration has been reinstated with ASIC since that time.

3. Generally speaking, a company that is deregistered ceases to exist as a legal entity: s 601AD(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). As an application for review of this type may only be made by the relevant sponsor or nominator, the effect of deregistration is that there is no longer a person who has standing to apply for, or continue with, an application for review.

4. The Tribunal invited comments on its preliminary view that it did not have jurisdiction because the company had been deregistered. There was no response to the Tribunal’s letter

5. The Tribunal finds that Fu Kang GC Pty Ltd has been deregistered and that it has ceased to exist as a legal entity. Accordingly, it follows that there is no longer a valid application for review.

   DECISION

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

   Namoi Dougall
   Member