Mehdi (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision relating to a Subclass 190 (Skilled Nomination – permanent) visa. The applicant, identified as the first named applicant, sought review of a decision concerning their eligibility for the visa. A second named applicant was also involved in the proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it had jurisdiction to consider the application for review in relation to both applicants. Specifically, the Tribunal was required to determine the jurisdictional requirements for an application for review of a decision under section 338(7A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), particularly concerning the physical presence of the applicant within the migration zone.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 347(2) of the Act, read with sections 347(2)(a) and (3A), limits the right to apply for review of a decision described in section 338(7A) to a non-citizen who is the subject of the decision and who is physically present in the migration zone at the time of both the primary decision and the application for review. Applying this to the present case, the Tribunal found that it only had jurisdiction with respect to the first named applicant, as the second named applicant was not physically present in the migration zone when both the primary decision and the application for review were made.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the first named applicant meets the criteria under clause 190.212 of Schedule 2 to the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The Tribunal explicitly stated that it had no jurisdiction with respect to the second named applicant.