Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia

You are here: 

YE (Migration) [2017] AATA  1764  (19 September 2017)

Last Updated: 23 October 2017

YE (Migration)  [2017] AATA 1764  (19 September 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION: Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS: Mrs Lihua YE
Mr Yuzhou YE

CASE NUMBER: 1617008

DIBP REFERENCE(S): BCC2016/394205

MEMBER: Wan Shum

DATE: 19 September 2017

PLACE OF DECISION: Sydney

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

Statement made on 19 September 2017 at 11:06am

CATCHWORDS
Migration – Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa – Decision already reviewed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65

CASES
Jayasinghe v MIEA [1997] FCA 551; (1997) 76 FCR 301
SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771
SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164

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 Immigration on 4 October 2016 to refuse to grant Employer Nomination (Permanent) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
2. The review application was lodged with the Tribunal on 13 October 2016. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to review the decision.
3. An application for review of the same delegate’s decision was previously made to the Tribunal. The Tribunal made a decision on that application on 14 September 2017. Where the Tribunal has received a valid application for review of a reviewable decision and carried out its statutory duty to review the decision under the Act, the decision is no longer a reviewable decision: SZBWJ v MIAC [2008] FMCA 164 at [41] and the cases cited therein. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to review a delegate’s decision twice: Jayasinghe v MIEA [1997] FCA 551; (1997) 76 FCR 301 and SZASP v MIAC [2007] FCA 771.
4. As the delegate’s decision has already been the subject of a valid review by the Tribunal, it is no longer a reviewable decision. Accordingly, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction in relation to that decision.

DECISION

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

Wan Shum
Member