Singh (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in relation to the cancellation of visas for multiple applicants. The primary applicant's visa was cancelled, and as a consequence, the visas of the second and third applicants were automatically cancelled by operation of law. The dispute centred on whether the AAT had jurisdiction to review the visa cancellations of the second and third applicants.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the visa cancellations of the second and third named applicants. This required the Tribunal to determine if their visa cancellations were the result of a "decision" that could be reviewed under section 348 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), or if they were automatically cancelled by operation of law.

The Tribunal reasoned that for its jurisdiction under section 348 of the Act to be engaged, there must be a "decision" to cancel a visa. It found that while the first applicant's visa cancellation was a decision amenable to review, the visas of the second and third applicants were cancelled automatically by force of section 140(1) of the Act, as a direct consequence of the first applicant's visa cancellation. Citing precedent, the Tribunal held that such self-executing cancellations do not involve a "decision" and therefore fall outside its review jurisdiction.

Consequently, the Tribunal confirmed the decision to dismiss the application of the first named applicant. However, the Tribunal determined that it had no jurisdiction with respect to the second and third named applicants.