Papanikos (Migration)

[2020] AATA 859

Papanikos (Migration) [2020] AATA 859 (17 March 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:  Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Anastasios Papanikos

CASE NUMBER:  2002345

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2017/1028115

MEMBER:  Tim Connellan

DATE:  17 March 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:  The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this

matter.

Statement made on 17 March 2020 at 11:06am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – application for review lodged out of time – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 347, 494C
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 4.10

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 15 January 2020 to refuse to grant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 7 February 2020. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.

2. 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.

3. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 15 January 2020 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. On 18 February 2020 the Tribunal sent the applicants a letter advising them of the preliminary view that their application was not lodged within the relevant timeframe. The Tribunal letter invited them to comment on the validity of their application for review. In submissions received on 2 March 2020 from the authorised recipient, it was stated that the recipient had believed the review timeframe was 28 days.

5. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 15 January 2020: s.494C of the Act. Therefore the prescribed period to apply for review ended on 5 February 2020.

6. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 7 February 2020 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

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

   Tim Connellan
   Member

Case Number 2002345  Page 2 of 2