Nurmalinda (Migration)

[2017] AATA 1777

Nurmalinda (Migration) [2017] AATA 1777 (4 July 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Miss Fahtia Nurmalinda

CASE NUMBER:  1711323

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/534188

MEMBER:Geraldine Hoeben

DATE:04/07/17

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 04 July 2017 at 10:22am

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – Review application out of time

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347(1)(b), 494C

Migration Regulation 1994, r 4.10

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 28 April 2017, to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 28 May 2017. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. Pursuant to s.347(1)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 21 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 28 April 2017 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. On the 14/06/17 the applicant wrote to the Tribunal and explained why she had not met the time limitation of 21 days for the lodgement of her appeal after notification of the relevant decision being 28/04/17. The applicant should have lodged her appeal no later than 19/05/17. She lodged a review on 28/05/17. The applicant explains she is a non English speaking person, was confused about the dates and times and argues that she has a good family and that she wishes to have the opportunity of finishing her studies in Australia. The applicant also submitted a reference dated 19/06/17 of character for both her and her family by an Australian employee who knows both her and her family when he was posted to Jakarta.

6. Unfortunately, the Tribunal has no discretion when it comes to time limitation periods in the circumstances of this case. The applicant did not comply with the limitation period for the lodging of her review application.

7. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 28 April 2017. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 19 May 2017. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 28 May 2017 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Geraldine Hoeben
   Member