_, ______«__€€Í“_____«{Snice (Migration) - [2024] AATA 101

_,
______«__€€Í“_____«{Snice (Migration) [2024] AATA 101 (16 January 2024)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  Ms Wame Snice
CASE NUMBER:  2319454
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2023/1753446
MEMBER:Joseph Lindsay
DATE:16 January 2024
PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

Statement made on 16 January 2024 at 1:35pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – previous application for review validly finalised – no longer reviewable decision – no jurisdiction
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
CASES
Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301
SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771
SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 21 July 2023 to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 29 November 2023. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.
An application for review of the same delegate’s decision was previously made to the Tribunal. The Tribunal made a decision on that application on 20 October 2023. Where the Tribunal has received a valid application for review of a reviewable decision and carried out its statutory duty to review the decision under the Act, the decision is no longer a reviewable decision: SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164 at [41] and the cases cited therein. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review a delegate’s decision twice: Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301 and SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771.
As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision. Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.
DECISION
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.
Joseph Lindsay
Member

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a matter concerning a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, subclass 500. The applicant sought review of a decision, but the AAT found that the delegate's decision had previously been validly reviewed by the Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the AAT was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision, given its prior finalisation through a valid review process.

The AAT reasoned that once a decision has been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it ceases to be a reviewable decision. Consequently, the Tribunal's jurisdiction in relation to that specific decision is extinguished. The Member concluded that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction in the present matter.

Reasons for decision

As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision. Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.DECISION The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.Joseph LindsayMember

_, «€€Í“_____«{Snice (Migration)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established