Jonni (Migration)

[2020] AATA 5805

Jonni (Migration) [2020] AATA 5805 (27 October 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Jonni Jonni

CASE NUMBER:  2008455

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC20201356976

MEMBER:Tania Flood

DATE:27 October 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 27 October 2020 at 9:52am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Bridging E (Class WE) visa – valid application –prescribed fee has not been paid – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347

Migration Regulations 1994, rr 4.10, 4.13

CASES
Braganza v MIMA (2001) 109 FCR 364

Kirk v MIMA (1998) 87 FCR 99

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 Immigration, dated 1 May 2020, to refuse to grant a Bridging E (Class WE) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application form was lodged with the Tribunal on 19 May 2020. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. Pursuant to s.347(1) of the Act and r.4.13 of the Migration Regulations 1994, this application had to be given to the Tribunal within the prescribed period, as specified in s.347(1)(b) and r.4.10, and accompanied by the prescribed fee unless a determination has been made under r.4.13(4) that the fee should be reduced on the basis of financial hardship. The prescribed period is set out in r.4.10 of the Regulations and starts when the applicant is notified of the decision. In the present case, the prescribed period ended on 22 May 2020. The fee must be paid within the prescribed period: Kirk v MIMA (1998) 87 FCR 99, or if a determination has been made under r.4.13(4), within a reasonable period after that determination: Braganza v MIMA (2001) 109 FCR 364.

4. On 26 May 2020 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant advising him that his application appears not to be a valid application as the application fee has not been paid.  The applicant was invited to make any comments on whether a valid application has been made, in writing, by 9 June 2020.  The applicant did not respond to the invitation.

5. The prescribed fee has not been paid and no determination has been made (or requested) that the fee should be reduced. In these circumstances, the application for review is not a valid application and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Tania Flood
   Member