Miglani (Migration)

Case [2023] AATA 3173


Miglani (Migration) [2023] AATA 3173 (26 September 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Sunny Miglani

CASE NUMBER:  2312901

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2020/2215289

MEMBER:Peter Papadopoulos

DATE:26 September 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 26 September 2023 at 12:22pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa – Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) – repeat application – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), rr 4.10, 4.13

CASES
Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301
SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771
SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

  1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 1 June 2023 to refuse to grant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

  2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 24 August 2023. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

  3. An application for review of the same delegate’s decision was previously made to the Tribunal. The Tribunal made a decision on that application on 13 July 2023. Where the Tribunal has received a valid application for review of a reviewable decision and carried out its statutory duty to review the decision under the Act, the decision is no longer a reviewable decision: SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164 at [41] and the cases cited therein. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review a delegate’s decision twice: Jayasinghe v MIEA (1997) 76 FCR 301 and SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771.

  4. On 7 September 2023, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant and informed him that it appeared the application was not a valid application as a review of the same decision had been previously made to the Tribunal on 6 June 2023. The case number for that first application is 2307990. The Tribunal made a decision on that application on 13 July 2023 and found that the other application was not a valid application and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to conduct a review. It is noted that three further applications in relation to the same delegate’s decision were also finalised with the same outcome on 13 July 2023 - case numbers 2308376, 2308379, and 2308386. The applicant was invited to comment on whether a valid application had been made by 21 September 2023. No response has been received.

  5. As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision.  Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.

    DECISION

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

    Peter Papadopoulos
    Member


Details
AGLC
Miglani (Migration) [2023] AATA 3173
Case
[2023] AATA 3173
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a migration matter concerning a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa, brought by Mr Miglani. The core of the dispute revolved around the Tribunal's jurisdiction to review a decision that had already been subject to a prior review.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision, given that this decision had previously been reviewed by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal reasoned that once a delegate's decision has been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it ceases to be a reviewable decision. Consequently, the Tribunal's jurisdiction in relation to that specific decision is extinguished. The Tribunal concluded that it did not have jurisdiction in this matter.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision. Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.DECISION The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.Peter PapadopoulosMember

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.