Kalamanda (Migration)

[2018] AATA 3426

Kalamanda (Migration) [2018] AATA 3426 (7 August 2018)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Goran Kalamanda

CASE NUMBER:  1819196

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/654876

MEMBER:Linda Holub

DATE:7 August 2018

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 07 August 2018 at 9:34am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa – Subclass 820 (Spouse) – review application out of time – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347, 494C
Migration Regulations 1994, 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 Immigration on 5 June 2018 to refuse to grant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 2 July 2018. 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 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.

3. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 5 June 2018 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 5 June 2018: s.494C of the Act. Therefore the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 26 June 2018.

5. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant on 20 July 2018 inviting him to comment on the validity of the application.  He was provided until 3 August 2018 to make any comments.  On 27 July 2018 the applicant responded by email.  He stated that one of the big reasons he could not apply for review in time was that he was not told by immigration staff that there was a time limit in which to lodge his application.  In addition, he stated that he had lost his passport number and that it was a long process to get a new number.  No evidence was provided in relation to a lost passport.

6. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 2 July 2018 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.

   Linda Holub
   Member