Sivameena (Migration)

The applicant, Sivameena, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning her application for a Child (Residence) (Class BT) visa, Subclass 802. The primary issue before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, constituted by Banfield J, was whether the AAT had jurisdiction to consider Sivameena's application for review.

The court was required to determine whether Sivameena's application for review to the AAT was validly made within the prescribed time limits. Specifically, the court considered whether the absence of a completed application form and the non-payment of the prescribed fee at the time of lodging the initial submissions constituted a failure to make a valid application for review, thereby divesting the AAT of jurisdiction.

Banfield J reasoned that a valid application for review to the AAT requires both the lodgement of the prescribed application form and the payment of the prescribed fee. The court found that Sivameena's initial submissions, which did not include the application form and for which the fee was not paid, did not constitute a valid application for review. Consequently, the AAT lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of her application.

The court ordered that the application for judicial review be dismissed.