Koirala v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, Mr Koirala, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the refusal of a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa. The dispute arose after the AAT, pursuant to section 359A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), provided the applicant with information and invited comments. No response was received by the Tribunal, nor was an extension of time granted. The applicant was also not entitled to appear before the Tribunal under section 360(3) of the Act.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the AAT had committed a jurisdictional error in its decision-making process. This involved considering whether the AAT had adequately discharged its obligations under section 359A and whether the applicant's inability to appear before the Tribunal constituted a jurisdictional error.

Justice Street found that the AAT had complied with its procedural obligations under section 359A by providing the applicant with the relevant information and an opportunity to respond. The court held that the applicant's failure to provide comments or seek an extension meant the AAT was entitled to proceed with its decision based on the information before it. Furthermore, the court determined that the applicant was not entitled to appear before the Tribunal under section 360(3), and therefore, the Tribunal's refusal to allow such an appearance did not constitute a jurisdictional error.

Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.