At the AAT – Visitor Visa Refusal

Visitor (Class FA) visa – application fee not paid – standing to apply – specified persons entitled to apply – no response to tribunal’s correspondence – no jurisdiction

This application seeks a review of the decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 23 March 2023, which denied the granting of a Visitor (Class FA) visa under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The application for review was submitted to the Tribunal on 25 April 2023. Upon review, the Tribunal has determined that it lacks jurisdiction to assess the decision because the application was not compliant with the relevant legislation.


According to section 347(1) of the Act and regulation 4.13 of the Migration Regulations 1994, this application was required to be submitted to the Tribunal within the specified period, as outlined in section 347(1)(b) and regulation 4.10, and accompanied by the prescribed fee, unless a determination was made under regulation 4.13(4) to reduce the fee due to financial hardship. The specified period is detailed in regulation 4.10 of the Regulations and commences upon notification of the decision to the applicant. The fee must be remitted within the specified period: Kirk v MIMA [1998] FCA 1174; (1998) 87 FCR 99, or within a reasonable period after a determination is made under regulation 4.13(4): Braganza v MIMA [2001] FCA 318; (2001) 109 FCR 364.
The individual entitled to apply to us regarding this decision is a parent/spouse/de facto partner/child/brother/sister of the visa applicant(s) who is an Australian citizen or permanent resident and whose details were included in the visa application: section 347(2)(c).


In this instance, the fee has not been paid, and the standing issue has not been rectified. The Tribunal has corresponded with the applicant twice, highlighting these deficiencies, yet no response has been received.
Due to the lack of response, the Tribunal has opted to assess the jurisdiction of the application.
As the prescribed fee has not been remitted, and no determination has been made (or requested) to reduce the fee, the application for review is deemed invalid, and the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction in this matter.
DECISION

The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction in this matter.

Written by Ross Ahmadzai

7 Mar, 2024

You may also be interested in…

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *