Parmar (Migration)

[2022] AATA 5181

Parmar (Migration) [2022] AATA 5181 (11 July 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Jodhveer Partap Singh Parmar

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Imran Nawaz Warraich

CASE NUMBER:  2112878

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/2022031

MEMBER: Margaret Forrest

DATE:11 July 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.

Statement made on 11 July 2022 at 1:03pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – non-appearance before the Tribunal – application dismissed – request for reinstatement of application declined – dismissal confirmed – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 362B, 362C

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 14 June 2018 to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) Subclass 500 visa under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. On 1 June 2022, the Tribunal dismissed the application under s 362B(1A)(b) of the Act as the review applicant did not appear before it to give evidence and present arguments at the time and date of the scheduled hearing.

3. The review applicant was notified of the dismissal decision and given a copy of a written statement setting out the decision and the reasons for the decision, in accordance with s 362C(5). The review applicant was advised that reinstatement of the application could be sought within 14 days of receiving the dismissal statement (by 15 June 2022) and that a failure to apply for reinstatement within the 14 day period would result in confirmation of the dismissal decision.

4. The review applicant applied for reinstatement of the application within 14 days after receiving notice of the decision (on 15 June 2022). For the following reasons, the Tribunal did not consider it appropriate to reinstate the application.

5. On 15 June 2022, the review applicant’s representative wrote to the Tribunal as follows:

   “Good day

   It is to request you to reinstate the review application as the review applicant was unable to attend the hearing due to unavoidable personal circumstances. The applicant advised that he was also not feeling good due to bad health condition and other symptoms.”

6. On 16 June 2022, the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant’s representative as follows:

   “I refer to your email below, in which you are requesting reinstatement of the review application of Mr Parmar on the basis that he was unable to attend the hearing due to unavoidable personal circumstances and due to bad health.

   The Member requests that the applicant provides medical certificate for the date of the hearing, which was 1 June 2022.

   The Member also requests an information that will outline, as why the applicant did not contact the Tribunal before the hearing or on the day of the hearing to advise that he could not attend.

   The Tribunal requests that you provide this information as soon as possible, as the timeframe for requesting the reinstatement has now passed.”

7. No response to the Tribunal’s email of 16 June 2022 was received by the Tribunal. 

8. On 27 June 2022, the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant’s representative as follows:

   “I refer to your email from 15 June 2022 and my response of 16 June 2022 (both below). In my email, I have outlined that Member requests that the applicant provides medical certificate for the date of the hearing, which was 1 June 2022, and that Member also requests an information that will outline, as why the applicant did not contact the Tribunal before the hearing or on the day of the hearing to advise that he could not attend.

   Tribunal notes that no response to our correspondence was received up to date. We now request that the requested information is submitted by 1 July 2022.

   Please note that if the requested information is not received by 1 July 2022, the Member will proceed with confirmation of the dismissal.”

9. No response to the Tribunal’s email of 27 June 2022 was received by the Tribunal. 

10. In the circumstances, the Tribunal is not persuaded that the application ought to be reinstated.

11. The decision to dismiss the application is confirmed. In these circumstances, the decision under review is taken to be affirmed.

    DECISION

12. The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.

    Margaret Forrest
    Member