NJCT and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for reinstatement of a withdrawn review application before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The parties were NJCT (the Applicant) and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (the Respondent). The Applicant had initially sought review of a decision to refuse him a Protection visa, but subsequently withdrew this application. The Tribunal dismissed the application following this withdrawal. The Respondent then applied to the Tribunal for reinstatement of the Applicant's application.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Respondent was a "party to the proceeding" for the purposes of section 42A(8) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, thereby enabling them to apply for reinstatement of the Applicant's withdrawn application. The Tribunal also had to consider whether any useful purpose would be served by reinstating the application and how the Applicant came to be bound by the deemed dismissal.

The Tribunal, in exercising its discretion under section 42A(9) of the Act, noted that both parties consented to the reinstatement. The Tribunal considered the principles established in *Evans v Bartlam*, which require consideration of whether any useful purpose would be served by setting aside a judgment and how the applicant came to be bound by it. The Tribunal found that the Applicant's circumstances had changed following legislative amendments, leading to his re-detention and a renewed interest in pursuing the review. The Tribunal was satisfied that reinstatement would serve a useful purpose, particularly given the parties' agreement and the Applicant's potential inability to reapply for a Protection visa while in the migration zone without a ministerial determination.

The Tribunal ordered that the Applicant's application for review be reinstated.