IBRAR (Migration)

[2024] AATA 280

IBRAR (Migration) [2024] AATA 280 (30 January 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Chaudhry Hamid IBRAR

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr tonio Thomas

CASE NUMBER:  2319968

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2023/4975931

MEMBER:De-Anne Kelly

DATE:30 January 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

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

Statement made on 30 January 2024 at 1:25pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – review application lodged out of time – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 347, 494C
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 4.10

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 9 November 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 7 December 2023. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. Pursuant to s 347(1)(b) of the Act and reg 4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 21 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

3. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 9 November 2023 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 9 November 2023: s 494C of the Act. Therefore, the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 30 November 2023.

5. On 9 January 2024 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant at the email address provided on the review application inviting a response by 23 January 2024 and advising that since the application was not lodged within the prescribed period of time the application may not be a valid application. On 22 January 2023 the applicant’s legal representative wrote acknowledging the application was out of time and explaining that this was due to the difficulties in securing legal representation, his mental health issues and lack of awareness of the technical legal requirements.

6. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 7 December 2023 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   De-Anne Kelly
   Member