Low (Migration)

[2019] AATA 6244

Low (Migration) [2019] AATA 6244 (21 October 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Shuang Yi Low

CASE NUMBER:  1913795

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2019/1438718

MEMBER:Stephen Witts

DATE:21 October 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 21 October 2019 at 8:44am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – no Tribunal-reviewable decision – duplicate review application for the same primary decision – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, s 29
Migration Act 1958, ss 338, 347, 411, 412
Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.02

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

1. An application was made to the Tribunal on 31 May 2019 for review of a decision to refuse to grant a student visa. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction in respect of this application.

2. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review a decision under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) if an application is properly made under s.347 or s.412 of that Act, or in limited circumstances not relevant to this application, s.29 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. Sections 338 and 411 of the Act and r.4.02(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 set out the range of decisions that are reviewable in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Tribunal. They include decisions to refuse visas of various kinds, but the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that this is a non-reviewable decision as this application for review was the first of two submitted to the Tribunal by the applicant in respect of the same decision by the delegate. The second review lodged was remitted to the Department on 17 July 2019. As such the decision that was being sought to be reviewed by the applicant no longer exists and therefore cannot be reviewed by us.

3. As there is no reviewable decision it follows that the application for review was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

4. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   Stephen Witts
   Member