Sherpa v Minister for Immigration & Anor

Sherpa, the applicant, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Migration Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) which found that it lacked jurisdiction to review a decision of the delegate because the application for review was out of time. The key issue was whether the Tribunal could review the decision of the delegate, given that the delegate's decision was not signed and therefore, arguably, not authenticated. This raised the question of whether a decision of a delegate requires authentication to be considered valid. Additionally, the case considered whether the applicant was properly notified of the delegate's decision, as the notification letter was also unsigned.

The court found that the Tribunal was correct in concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision. The court held that the decision of the delegate must be authenticated, and as it was not signed, it was not a valid decision. Furthermore, the court held that the applicant was not properly notified of the decision as the notification letter was unsigned. The court held that the Tribunal could not review a purported decision that was not properly authenticated or communicated to the applicant. Therefore, the court dismissed the application for judicial review.

The court further considered whether the Tribunal should be empowered to extend the time for making review applications. However, the court found that this issue was not before it and did not make any orders in relation to it. The court dismissed the application for judicial review and made no orders in relation to the issue of extending the time for making review applications.