Liu and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral made by Mrs Liu, which was rejected by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Mrs Liu was advised of her right to seek a review of this decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), but she failed to lodge an application for review within the prescribed time limit. The AAT, constituted by Senior Member D. J. Morris, was therefore required to determine whether to grant an extension of time for Mrs Liu to lodge her application for review.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to extend the time for Mrs Liu to lodge her application for review of the decision to refuse her citizenship. In considering this, the Tribunal had to assess various factors, including the extent of the delay, the explanation provided for the delay, any prejudice to the respondent or the public, whether the applicant had rested on her rights, the merits of the substantive application, and the availability of alternative avenues of relief. The Tribunal also considered the interpretation of the criterion under section 21(2)(g) of the Australian Citizenship Act 1948 (Cth), which requires an applicant to demonstrate an intention to reside in Australia or maintain a close and continuing association with Australia.

The Tribunal applied the principles outlined in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*, which provide a non-exhaustive list of factors to consider when determining whether to extend time. Mrs Liu's application was lodged 34 days after the statutory period expired. While the Tribunal accepted that Mrs Liu was overseas attending to family matters and medical procedures, it found that these circumstances did not prevent her from lodging an application for review or authorising someone else to do so on her behalf. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that Mrs Liu had rested on her rights. Although the Tribunal considered that Mrs Liu's substantive application for citizenship was not without merit, and that extending time would not unduly prejudice the respondent, it found some prejudice to the general public in the expectation of observing statutory time limits.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to extend the time for Mrs Liu to lodge her application for review. The Tribunal noted that an alternative avenue of relief was available to Mrs Liu, namely the ability to lodge a fresh application for citizenship as a permanent resident of Australia. Accordingly, the Tribunal refused to extend time under section 29(7) of the AAT Act.