Liu v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection [2014] FCA 469

Liu v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection [2014] FCA 469

The appellants did not demonstrate that the review application was received by the Tribunal within the mandatory 21 day time limit. The alleged facsimile attempt was unsupported by evidence and, in any event, an attempt to give was not actual giving. Regulation 4.11(1)(d) was not in effect at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to deal with the out-of-time application and the Federal Circuit Court made no appealable error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning a Migration Review Tribunal Review Application / Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['business Skills (residence) (class Df) Subclass 890 Visa' 'migration Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'statutory Time Limit for Review Application' 'facsimile Transmission of Review Application']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['business Skills (residence) (class Df) Subclass 890 Visa' 'migration Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'statutory Time Limit for Review Application' 'facsimile Transmission of Review Application']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning a Migration Review Tribunal Review Application / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal wrongly declined jurisdiction over the review application.' 'Whether the review application was received by the Tribunal within the mandatory 21 day time limit.' 'Whether an alleged attempt to send the review application by facsimile on 18 September 2012 was a relevant consideration establishing timely lodgement.' 'Whether reg 4.11(1)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) applied at the relevant time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants did not demonstrate that the review application was received by the Tribunal within the mandatory 21 day time limit. The alleged facsimile attempt was unsupported by evidence and, in any event, an attempt to give was not actual giving. Regulation 4.11(1)(d) was not in effect at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to deal with the out-of-time application and the Federal Circuit Court made no appealable error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellants pay the first respondent Minister's costs of the appeal."]