Gomez (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a dispute concerning a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, where the applicant argued that the primary decision regarding their visa application had not been validly notified. The core of the applicant's contention was that the Department's notification letter failed to adequately inform them of the time limit for seeking a review of the decision.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the notification letter issued by the Department constituted valid notification of the primary decision under sections 494D(1) and 494D(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This involved assessing whether the letter sufficiently stated the time within which an application for review could be made, particularly in relation to when the applicant was taken to have received the notification.

The Tribunal reasoned that the notification letter did not validly state the time for making a review application because it did not explain that this period is calculated from the date the applicant's authorised recipient is deemed to have received the notification. Applying the principles from *Sandor v MICMA* [2023] FCA 434, the Tribunal concluded that the prescribed period for lodging a review application had not commenced. Consequently, the Tribunal found that it did not have jurisdiction in the matter, as the applicant had not been validly notified of the primary decision.