McGrath and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2017] AATA 2422
•1 December 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
McGrath and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2017] AATA 2422
[2017] AATA 2422
1 December 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Ms McGrath against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) First Review (AAT1). The Secretary of the Department of Social Services contended that the AAT Second Review (AAT2), the current Tribunal, lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed the legislative power to review a decision by the AAT1 that had dismissed an application for review, rather than affirming, varying, setting aside, or substituting the original decision.
The Tribunal agreed with the Secretary's submissions, concluding that its jurisdiction was limited to reviewing specific types of decisions made by the AAT1, as defined by the relevant legislation. The Tribunal noted that the legislation, including the current section 128 of the Administration Act and its predecessor, did not grant it the power to review a decision to dismiss an application. The Tribunal reasoned that it was a creature of statute and did not possess inherent jurisdiction. Therefore, as the AAT1 had dismissed Ms McGrath's application for review of an Administrative Review Officer's decision, rather than making one of the statutorily defined reviewable decisions, the AAT2 lacked the jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The Tribunal noted that it was open for Ms McGrath to apply again for leave to appeal out of time to the AAT1.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed the legislative power to review a decision by the AAT1 that had dismissed an application for review, rather than affirming, varying, setting aside, or substituting the original decision.
The Tribunal agreed with the Secretary's submissions, concluding that its jurisdiction was limited to reviewing specific types of decisions made by the AAT1, as defined by the relevant legislation. The Tribunal noted that the legislation, including the current section 128 of the Administration Act and its predecessor, did not grant it the power to review a decision to dismiss an application. The Tribunal reasoned that it was a creature of statute and did not possess inherent jurisdiction. Therefore, as the AAT1 had dismissed Ms McGrath's application for review of an Administrative Review Officer's decision, rather than making one of the statutorily defined reviewable decisions, the AAT2 lacked the jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The Tribunal noted that it was open for Ms McGrath to apply again for leave to appeal out of time to the AAT1.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Appeal
-
Intention
-
Statutory Construction
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
FSDH and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Citizenship) [2018] AATA 1844
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0