JU (Migration)

[2017] AATA 1711

JU (Migration) [2017] AATA 1711 (9 August 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  CHEN JU

CASE NUMBER:  1713862

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/814784

MEMBER:Lilly Mojsin

DATE:9 August 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 09 August 2017 at 5:02pm

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – Review application lodged out of time

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347, 494C

Migration Regulations 1994, r.4.10

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application has been lodged for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, dated 6 June 2017, to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 29 June 2017. 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)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (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.

4. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 6 June 2017 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. On 14 July 2017, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant, at the applicant’s address for service, inviting comment that the application was not a valid application as it was not lodged within the relevant time limit. The applicant did not respond.

6. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 6 June 2017. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 27 June 2017. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 29 June 2017 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.

   Lilly Mojsin
   Member