Nashimoto (Migration)

[2019] AATA 2105

Nashimoto (Migration) [2019] AATA 2105 (15 March 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Emi Nashimoto

CASE NUMBER:  1834176

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/4900193

MEMBER:Bridget Cullen

DATE:15 March 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

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

Statement made on 15 March 2019 at 4:06pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – standing to apply for review – sponsor or nominator – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 338, 347
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 4.02

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application has been lodged for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, dated 25 October 2018, to refuse to grant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). This decision is reviewable under s.338(9) of the Act.

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 21 November 2018. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. Section 347(2) and r.4.02(5) of the Migration Regulations 1994 specify who has the right to apply for review of a decision that is reviewable under Part 5 of the Act. In the case of a decision described in s.338(9) and r.4.02(4)(l), an application for review may only be made by the sponsor or nominator: r.4.02(5)(k).

4. As the decision that is the subject of the review application is a decision covered by s.338(9) and r.4.02(4)(l), the application for review could only be made by the sponsor or nominator. In the present case, the review application was made by the visa applicant. As such, the application for review is not an application properly made under s.347 and it follows that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Bridget Cullen
   Member