FXXN and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by FXXN for Australian citizenship by conferral. FXXN had applied for citizenship while holding a protection visa, but a delegate of the Minister refused the application, being unsatisfied that FXXN was of good character at the time of the decision. Subsequently, a separate delegate of the Minister cancelled FXXN's visa, meaning he was no longer a permanent resident. FXXN sought review of the citizenship refusal decision before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether FXXN's application for review had no reasonable prospect of success, thereby justifying its dismissal. This required the Tribunal to determine if FXXN could still satisfy the eligibility requirements for citizenship, specifically the requirement to be a permanent resident at the time of the Minister's decision on the application, given the subsequent cancellation of his visa. The Tribunal also considered its powers to dismiss applications that are futile or where continuing proceedings would be an inappropriate use of resources.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 21(2)(b) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth) requires an applicant to be a permanent resident both at the time of their application and at the time of the Minister's decision on that application. While FXXN was a permanent resident when he applied and when the initial refusal decision was made, the subsequent cancellation of his visa meant he was no longer a permanent resident as defined by the Act at the time of the Tribunal's review. Consequently, an essential prerequisite for the grant of citizenship was no longer met. Applying the principles from *Re: Paraponiaris and Secretary, Department of Employment* [2015] AATA 895, the Tribunal concluded that it would be futile for the proceedings to continue, as no discretion exercisable by the Tribunal could lead to a beneficial outcome for FXXN.

The Tribunal dismissed FXXN's application for review as having no reasonable prospect of success. The Tribunal noted that FXXN might lodge a fresh application in the future if his circumstances changed and he again met the eligibility criteria.