Galvez (Migration)

[2020] AATA 1430

Galvez (Migration) [2020] AATA 1430 (23 April 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REVIEW APPLICANTS:  Ms Maria de los Angeles Galvez
Mr Julian Andres Obaid

VISA APPLICANT:  Master Julian Jesus Obaid

CASE NUMBER:  1934645

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  CLF2019105593

MEMBER:Kira Raif

DATE:23 April 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 23 April 2020 at 2.57 pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Visitor (Class FA) visa – Subclass 600 (Visitor) – application for review can only be made by sponsor, nominator or specified relative – application made by visa applicant – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 338(7), 347(2)(c)

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 3 December 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 7 December 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. 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 sponsor, nominator or relative referred to in that subsection. In the present case, the review application was made by the visa applicant. Further, the Tribunal has formed the view that there is no Tribunal-reviewable decision. 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

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

   Kira Raif
   Senior Member