Sikchi (Migration)

[2024] AATA 2351

Sikchi (Migration) [2024] AATA 2351 (21 June 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Naman Sikchi

CASE NUMBER:  2408543

MEMBER:Nicole Burns

DATE:21 June 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

Statement made on 21 June 2024 at 3:32pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – no Tribunal-reviewable decision – applicant not in the migration zone – no jurisdiction

LEGISLATION

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, s 29
Migration Act 1958, ss 338, 347, 411, 412
Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.02

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application was made to the Tribunal on 17 April 2024 for review of a decision to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Subclass 500) visa. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction in respect of this application.

2. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review a decision under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act) if an application is properly made under s 347 or s 412 of that Act, or in limited circumstances not relevant to this application, s 29 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth). Sections 338 and 411 of the Act and reg 4.02(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) set out the range of decisions that are reviewable in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Tribunal and the circumstances in which they are reviewable. A decision to refuse to grant a Student (Subclass 500) visa is reviewable if the applicant made the visa application while in the migration zone and the decision was not made when the applicant was in immigration clearance or had been refused immigration clearance and had not subsequently been immigration cleared. However it is not reviewable in the circumstances of this case because the applicant was not in the migration zone when the visa application was lodged on 24 January 2024.

3. By letter dated 10 May 2024 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant seeking his comments about this issue.  No response was received.

4. As the delegate’s decision is not reviewable in these circumstances it follows that the application for review was not properly made and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

5. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.

   Nicole Burns
   Member