SU (Migration)

[2017] AATA 2847

SU (Migration) [2017] AATA 2847 (14 December 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Xuan SU

CASE NUMBER:  1729059

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  CLF2014/61408

MEMBER:Gabrielle Cullen

DATE:14 December 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

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

Statement made on 14 December 2017 at 3:25pm

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 572 Vocational Education and Training Sector – Review application out of time

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 347, 494C

Migration Regulations 1994, r 4.10

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. An application has been lodged for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, dated 11 July 2014, to refuse to grant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 21 November 2017. 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)(b) of the Act and r.4.10 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) an application for review of this decision had to be made within 21 days after the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

4. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified of the decision by letter dated 11 July 2014 and dispatched by email. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

5. On 28 November 2017 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant a letter to the email address outlined for correspondence in the applicant’s application for review form, advising that the applicant lodged her review application on 23 November 2017 and that the last day for lodging the application for review was 1 August 2014. The letter indicated that the application appears to be out of time but invited the applicant to make comments as to whether a valid application has been made. The applicant was requested to respond by 12 December 2017.  No response has been received by the applicant to this letter as at the time of this decision.

6. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on11 July 2014. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 1 August 2014. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 21 November 2017 it follows that the application for review was not made in accordance with the relevant legislation and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in this matter.

   DECISION

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

   Gabrielle Cullen
   Member