Hegade (Migration)

[2024] AATA 1606

Hegade (Migration) [2024] AATA 1606 (25 March 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Miss Lalita Hegade

CASE NUMBER:  2401115

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC202443282

MEMBER:Wendy Banfield

DATE:25 March 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Canberra

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

Statement made on 25 March 2024 at 2:53pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Visitor (Class FA) visa – application for review was not valid – did not meet the criteria for a Part-5 reviewable decision – no right of merits review for this decision – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, s 29

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 338, 347,411, 412, Schedule 2

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.02

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application was made to the Tribunal on 24 January 2024 for review of a decision to refuse an application for a Visitor (class FA) Visitor (Tourist) (subclass 600) visa. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction in respect of this application.

2. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review a decision under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act) if an application is properly made under s 347 or s 412 of that Act, or in limited circumstances not relevant to this application, s 29 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth). Sections 338 and 411 of the Act and reg 4.02(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) set out the range of decisions that are reviewable in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Tribunal and the circumstances in which they are reviewable. A decision to review a Visitor (class FA) Visitor (Tourist) (subclass 600) visa is reviewable if the applicant is visiting a prescribed family member but is not reviewable in the circumstances of this case. A part 5-reviewable decision under s 338(7) of the Act requires that particulars of the Australian citizen or permanent resident relative concerned who the visa applicant intends to visit, who is a brother, sister, parent, spouse, de facto partner or child of the visa applicant are included in the visa application. No such particulars are included in this case.

3. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 27 February 2024 inviting comment on the validity of the application for review by 12 March 2024. There was no response to the invitation.

4. As the delegate’s decision is not reviewable in these circumstances it follows that the application for review was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Wendy Banfield
   Member