Kanda (Migration)

Case

[2016] AATA 4895

14 March 2016


Kanda (Migration) [2016] AATA 4895 (14 March 2016)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:  Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Harpreet Singh Kanda

CASE NUMBER:  1417542

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  CLF2013/76338

MEMBER:  Rieteke Chenoweth

DATE:  14 March 2016

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:  The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

Statement made on 14 March 2016 at 12:32pm

CATCHWORDS
Migration – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) – Subclass 820 (Spouse) – Application dismissed – Reinstatement not sought – Decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 362B, 362C

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

  1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 8 October 2014 to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) Subclass 820 visa under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

  1. On 24 February 2016 the Tribunal dismissed the application under s.362B(1A)(b) of the Act as the review applicant did not appear before it to give evidence and present arguments at the time and date of the scheduled hearing.

  1. The review applicant was notified of the dismissal decision and given a copy of a written statement setting out the decision and the reasons for the decision, in accordance with s.362C(5). The review applicant was advised that reinstatement of the application could be sought within 14 days of receiving the dismissal statement and that a failure to apply for reinstatement within the 14 day period would result in confirmation of the dismissal decision.

  1. As the review applicant did not apply for reinstatement of the application within the 14 days period, the Tribunal must confirm the decision to dismiss the application.

DECISION

  1. The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

Rieteke Chenoweth Member

Case Number 1417542  Page 2 of 2

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Natural Justice

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0