Romero v Minister for Home Affairs

This matter concerned an application for review by the applicant to the Tribunal of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs. The applicant sought review of a decision dated 20 October 2017, lodging his application with the Tribunal on 23 November 2017. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had lodged his application within the prescribed time limit for review.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's application for review was "properly made under" section 347 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required the court to determine if the application was lodged within the "prescribed period" as stipulated by section 347(1)(b) of the Act and regulation 4.10(1)(a) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The prescribed period commences upon the applicant receiving notice of the decision and concludes at the end of 21 days thereafter.

The court reasoned that the Tribunal's jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision was contingent on the application being filed within the statutory time limit. It examined the provisions of the *Migration Act* and *Migration Regulations* concerning notification of decisions. Specifically, the court considered sections 66 and 67 of the Act, read in conjunction with regulation 2.16 and section 494B of the Act, to establish the method by which the Minister must notify an applicant of a decision to refuse a visa. The court concluded that notification requires the decision to be recorded in a document and that document to be given to the applicant by one of the methods prescribed by section 494B. The enlivening of the Tribunal's jurisdiction, therefore, depended on the jurisdictional fact of whether the application was lodged within the prescribed statutory time, which in turn depended on when the applicant received notice of the decision.