Snice (Migration)

[2023] AATA 4454

Snice (Migration) [2023] AATA 4454 (20 October 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Wame Snice

CASE NUMBER:  2312064

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2023/1753446

MEMBER:Justin Meyer

DATE:20 October 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 20 October 2023 at 4.11pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – prescribed fee – non-payment of fee – No jurisdiction

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 347,
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), rr 4.10, 4.13

CASES
Braganza v MIMA (2001) 109 FCR 364
Kirk v MIMA (1998) 87 FCR 99

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs, dated 21 July 2023, to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The review application form was lodged with the Tribunal on 11 August 2023. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision as the application was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation.

3. Pursuant to s 347(1) of the Act and reg 4.13 of the Migration Regulations 1994, this application had to be given to the Tribunal within the prescribed period, as specified in s 347(1)(b) and reg 4.10, and accompanied by the prescribed fee unless a determination has been made under reg 4.13(4) that the fee should be reduced on the basis of financial hardship. The prescribed period is set out in reg 4.10 of the Regulations and starts when the applicant is notified of the decision. In the present case, the prescribed period ended on . The fee must be paid within the prescribed period: Kirk v MIMA (1998) 87 FCR 99, or if a determination has been made under reg 4.13(4), within a reasonable period after that determination: Braganza v MIMA (2001) 109 FCR 364.

4. The applicant made this submission:

   On August 11, 2023, I applied for a review for Student VISA refusal. During the application process I did not pay the application fee. I only became aware of the application fee upon receiving an email from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on August 28, 2023. I went back to the application and noticed that I ticked a box stating I needed protection. That is the only unfortunate mistake on the application. I am of the opinion that the application is still valid even without the application fee. All necessary documentation has been uploaded, it is therefore my plea that the application be considered valid.

5. The prescribed fee has not been paid and no determination has been made (or requested) that the fee should be reduced. In these circumstances, the application for review is not a valid application and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Justin Meyer
   Member