Senanayake and Migration Agents Registration Authority (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Senanayake for a stay of a decision made by the Migration Agents Registration Authority (MARA) to cancel his registration as a migration agent. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether it had the power to grant such a stay.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether section 300(7) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) prevented the Tribunal from granting a stay of a decision to cancel a migration agent's registration, thereby preventing the agent's registration from continuing beyond the date of cancellation. MARA argued that this provision, in conjunction with the scheme of the Act, rendered any grant of a stay futile.

The Tribunal accepted MARA's submission, relying on the Full Federal Court's decision in *Seymour v Migration Agents Registration Authority*. The Tribunal reasoned that section 300(7) dictates that a decision to cancel registration is effective even if later stayed, and that a stay would therefore have no effect in reviving a registration that had ceased. Mr Senanayake's argument that correspondence regarding a separate registration application made his situation unique was not persuasive, as the Tribunal found this to be distinct from the application for a stay and the substantive review.

Consequently, the Tribunal refused Mr Senanayake's application for a stay of MARA's decision dated 9 October 2017.