//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
austlii:cth/RRTA/1998/1169
appellant. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant a protection visa
No linked legislation citations have been extracted yet.
The Refugee Review Tribunal dismissed a protection visa application because the applicant had left Australia before the decision was made. The Migration Act requires that a protection visa applicant must be in Australia at the time of the decision. Since the applicant had departed in late 1997 and was not present when the Tribunal decided the matter in March 1998, he could not satisfy this basic requirement. The Tribunal therefore did not need to consider whether he had a genuine refugee claim.
AI-generated legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Check the cited source, and for advice about your situation consult a qualified Australian lawyer.
Decision: The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant a protection visa.
Catchwords: Applicant not in Australia at time of decision
The applicant, who is a citizen of Indonesia, arrived in Australia in 1996. On 9 August 1996 the applicant applied to the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs for a protection visa under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). On 30 July 1997 a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs refused to grant a protection visa and on 20 August 1997 the applicant sought review of the delegate's decision by this Tribunal.
No issue arises in this case as to the validity of the application for review or as to the Tribunal's jurisdiction to review the delegate's decision.
Section 36(2) of the Act provides that "a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol". The effect of this provision is that a protection visa may only be granted if the applicant is in Australia.
The Department's movements records indicate that the applicant is not in Australia. It appears that he has been outside Australia since late 1997. There is no information before the Tribunal as to the circumstances of the applicant's departure, or whether he intends to return to Australia.
In these circumstances the Tribunal has proceeded to make its decision on the basis that the applicant does not satisfy the requirements of s.36(2) of the Act, and cannot be granted a protection visa.
Having reached this conclusion, it is not necessary to consider whether the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol.
The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant a protection visa.
The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant a protection visa