SZNZL v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 621

SZNZL v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 621

The appellant's telephone communication on 29 April 2009 was in fact received by an officer of the Department and could be acted upon under s 52(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). It was properly inferred to communicate that the Inglewood Street address was the appellant's residential address for relevant purposes and that he intended to reside there for more than 14 days. The Minister's delegate therefore validly sent the 5 June 2009 refusal notification to that address under s 494B(4), and the appellant was deemed to have received it about 16 or 17 June 2009. The review application lodged on 31 July 2009 was outside the 28 day period, the Tribunal had no power to extend time and no...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia in a Migration Judicial Review Matter / Appeal Against Dismissal of Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision That It Lacked Jurisdiction Because the Review Application Was Lodged Out of Time
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'notification of Decision' 'change of Address' 'prescribed Communication With Minister' 'refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'time Limit for Merits Review' 'procedural Fairness']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'notification of Decision' 'change of Address' 'prescribed Communication With Minister' 'refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'time Limit for Merits Review' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia in a Migration Judicial Review Matter / Appeal Against Dismissal of Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision That It Lacked Jurisdiction Because the Review Application Was Lodged Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Minister notified the appellant of the refusal of the protection visa application in a legally effective way so that the 28 day time period for lodging a review application with the Refugee Review Tribunal began running.' "Whether the Minister could act on the appellant's telephone advice of a changed current residential address for the purposes of sending the notification letter." 'Whether reliance on the telephone advice involved a denial of procedural fairness.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's telephone communication on 29 April 2009 was in fact received by an officer of the Department and could be acted upon under s 52(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). It was properly inferred to communicate that the Inglewood Street address was the appellant's residential address for relevant purposes and that he intended to reside there for more than 14 days. The Minister's delegate therefore validly sent the 5 June 2009 refusal notification to that address under s 494B(4), and the appellant was deemed to have received it about 16 or 17 June 2009. The review application lodged on 31 July 2009 was outside the 28 day period, the Tribunal had no power to extend time and no...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed if not agreed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant to pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed if not agreed."]