MINAKSHI (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the application of Ms Minakshi for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister regarding her Skilled Employer Sponsored Regional (Provisional) (Class PE) visa (subclass 494). The core of the dispute concerned whether the AAT had jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision, given the circumstances surrounding Ms Minakshi's visa application and the nomination process.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to hear and determine Ms Minakshi's application for review. This question hinged on whether the delegate's decision to refuse the visa application was a reviewable decision under the relevant migration legislation, particularly in light of the fact that there was no approved nomination or an application for review of a decision not to approve a nomination in progress at the time of the visa refusal.

The Tribunal reasoned that for an application for review to be validly made, the underlying decision must be one that is capable of review by the Tribunal. In this instance, the Tribunal found that because there was no approved nomination, and no review of a nomination refusal was underway, the delegate's decision to refuse the visa application was not a reviewable decision. Consequently, Ms Minakshi's application for review was not properly made.

As a result of this determination, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the review of the delegate's decision. The application for review was therefore dismissed.