Rob and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for reinstatement of a review of a decision to refuse citizenship by conferral. The applicant had failed to attend the citizenship test on multiple occasions, which formed the basis of the delegate's refusal. Following the refusal, the applicant filed an application for review with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The AAT dismissed the application for review under s 42A(2)(a) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth) due to the applicant's failure to attend an interlocutory hearing convened to consider the respondent's application to dismiss. The applicant then sought to have this dismissal set aside and her application reinstated.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was appropriate to reinstate the applicant's application for review, considering her explanation for failing to attend the interlocutory hearing and her overall conduct in prosecuting the review. The Tribunal was required to assess the adequacy of the applicant's explanation for her non-attendance, which she attributed to being unable to access the internet due to a change of address and personal issues including anxiety and stress stemming from a marital separation.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's explanation for her failure to attend the interlocutory hearing on 2 October 2019. While the applicant provided a psychologist's report diagnosing an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depression, the report was dated twelve months prior to her application for review and did not indicate memory or cognitive deficits that would explain her forgetfulness. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided an adequate explanation for her non-appearance. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted a pattern of non-compliance, including previous failures to attend preliminary conferences and citizenship test appointments, and a late adjournment request.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was appropriate to reinstate the applicant's application for review, having regard to the unsatisfactory explanation for her non-attendance at the interlocutory hearing, her ongoing failure to prosecute the application, and the lack of merit in the application itself. Consequently, the Tribunal declined to reinstate the application for review pursuant to s 42A(9) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth).