CVRZ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 126

CVRZ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 126

The 84 day period in s 500(6L) commenced when CVRZ was notified of the delegate's decision, not when the delegate made the decision. CVRZ acknowledged receipt of notification on 25 May 2020, so the period expired on 17 August 2020. Because the Tribunal delivered its decision on 17 August 2020, it complied with s 500(6L). The Tribunal's reference to 13 August 2020 as the final business day before the 84th day did not show that it misunderstood the statutory time limit, as it identified 17 August 2020 as the relevant 84th day and stated that it complied by publishing its decision then.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review of a Decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Refusing to Revoke the Cancellation of the Applicant's Visa / Originating Application Dismissed
Outcome
The originating application was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'visa Cancellation' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Time Limit' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 500(6 L)']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'visa Cancellation' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Time Limit' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 500(6 L)']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review of a Decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Refusing to Revoke the Cancellation of the Applicant's Visa / Originating Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made a jurisdictional error by making its decision outside the time limit in s 500(6L) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal misunderstood the word "days" in s 500(6L) as meaning "business days" and thereby misapprehended the extent of its jurisdiction.']

Ratio Decidendi

The 84 day period in s 500(6L) commenced when CVRZ was notified of the delegate's decision, not when the delegate made the decision. CVRZ acknowledged receipt of notification on 25 May 2020, so the period expired on 17 August 2020. Because the Tribunal delivered its decision on 17 August 2020, it complied with s 500(6L). The Tribunal's reference to 13 August 2020 as the final business day before the 84th day did not show that it misunderstood the statutory time limit, as it identified 17 August 2020 as the relevant 84th day and stated that it complied by publishing its decision then.

Court Disposition

The originating application was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The originating application filed 11 September 2020 is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $7,241."]