Taste India Pty Ltd (Migration)

[2017] AATA 1722

Taste India Pty Ltd (Migration) [2017] AATA 1722 (19 August 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Taste India Pty Ltd

CASE NUMBER:  1716079

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2016/2012137

MEMBER:Karen Synon

DATE:19 August 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 19 August 2017 at 12:21pm

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Employer nomination – Review application lodged out of time

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 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 17 October 2016, to refuse a nomination under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 25 July 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. On reviewing the application the Tribunal formed the preliminary view that it did not have jurisdiction because the application for review was not received within the prescribed period for lodgement.  The Tribunal wrote to the applicant, via email on 1 August 2017 inviting written submissions on the issue of jurisdiction by 15 August 2017.  No response has been received.

5. The material before the Tribunal indicates that the applicant was notified, via its authorised representative of the decision by letter dated 17 October 2016 and dispatched by email.  The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was notified of the decision in accordance with the statutory requirements.

6. The Tribunal finds that in accordance with s.494C of the Act, the applicant is taken to have been notified of the decision on 17 October 2016. Therefore the prescribed period within which the review application could be made ended on 7 November 2016. As the application for review was not received by the Tribunal until 25 July 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.

   Karen Synon
   Member