Teague (Migration)

[2017] AATA 2885

Teague (Migration) [2017] AATA 2885 (15 December 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Darren Joseph Teague
Ms Emily Vivienne Budden

CASE NUMBER:  1617595

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2016/1503708

MEMBER:Saxon Rice

DATE:15 December 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.

Statement made on 15 December 2017 at 8:29am

CATCHWORDS

Migration – Temporary business entry (Class UC) – Subclass 457 (Temporary work (Skilled)) – Review applicants did not appear – Departed Australia

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 360, 362B, 362C, 379A

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of decisions made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 13 October 2016 to refuse to grant the visa applicants Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) Subclass 457 visas under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. On 30 November 2017 the Tribunal dismissed the application under s.362B(1A)(b) of the Act as the review applicants did not appear before it to give evidence and present arguments at the time and date of the scheduled hearing.

3. The review applicant was invited under s.360 of the Migration Act 1958 to appear before the Tribunal on 30 November 2017 at 9.00am. The invitation stated that if they did not attend the hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the application for review without any further consideration of the application or the information before it. The Tribunal also sent SMS reminders about the hearing 5 business days and one business day before the scheduled hearing.

4. The review applicant did not appear before the Tribunal on the day and at the scheduled time and place. Having reviewed the Tribunal file, the Tribunal is satisfied that the review applicant was properly invited to a hearing in accordance with s.379A(5), the invitation has not been returned to sender, and that two separate SMS reminders were also sent to the review applicant about the hearing. The Tribunal notes that it attempted to contact the review applicant on 15 November 2017 by telephone to the mobile phone number provided by the applicant and this number rang out to a message bank for a different person. As a result, and noting that department records indicate that the review applicant departed Australia on 3 May 2017, the Tribunal sent its invitation to attending a hearing via email to all emails on record for the review applicant and the secondary applicant. The Tribunal received no response to these emails and no satisfactory reason for the non-appearance has been given.

5. The review applicants were notified of the dismissal decision and given a copy of a written statement setting out the decision and the reasons for the decision, in accordance with s.362C(5). The review applicants were advised that reinstatement of the application could be sought within 14 days of receiving the dismissal statement and that a failure to apply for reinstatement within the 14 day period would result in confirmation of the dismissal decision.

6. As the review applicants did not apply for reinstatement of the application within the 14 days period, the Tribunal must confirm the decision to dismiss the application. In these circumstances, the decisions under review are taken to be affirmed.

   DECISION

7. The Tribunal confirms the decision to dismiss the application.

   Saxon Rice
   Member