Milon v Minister for Immigration

In Milon v Minister for Immigration, the Applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, sought judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) to refuse his application for a student visa. The Applicant had originally applied for a student visa on 2 July 2007, but the delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship refused the application on 17 September 2007, finding that the Applicant did not meet the financial requirements for a subclass 573 visa. The Applicant applied to the MRT for review of the delegate's decision on 15 May 2008, well beyond the 12-month period in which such an application could be lodged. The MRT found that the Applicant was taken to have received notification of the delegate's decision on 26 September 2007, and that the last day for lodging an application for review was 17 October 2007. Accordingly, the MRT found that it had no jurisdiction to hear the Applicant's review application, and dismissed it. The Applicant sought judicial review of the MRT's decision, claiming that he had not received notice of the delegate's decision until 12 May 2008.

The central legal issue in this case was whether the Tribunal was correct to find that the Applicant was taken to have received notice of the delegate's decision on 26 September 2007, and whether this meant that the Applicant's application for review was out of time. The Applicant submitted that he had not received notice of the delegate's decision until 12 May 2008, and that the Tribunal should therefore have considered his application for review. The Respondent submitted that the Tribunal was correct to find that the Applicant was taken to have received notice of the delegate's decision on 26 September 2007, and that the Tribunal was therefore correct to find that it had no jurisdiction to hear the Applicant's application for review.

The court found that the Tribunal's reasoning was correct, and that the Applicant was taken to have received notice of the delegate's decision on 26 September 2007. The court held that the Tribunal was correct to find that it had no jurisdiction to hear the Applicant's application for review, as it was lodged beyond the 12-month period in which such an application could be made. The court held that the Tribunal was correct to find that the Applicant was taken to have received notice of the delegate's decision, as the delegate's letter was sent in accordance with the statutory requirements, and there was no evidence that the Applicant had not received the letter. The court held that the Tribunal's decision was therefore correct, and dismissed the Applicant's application for judicial review.

The court made no orders as to costs.