Miller v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs

Statutes – Construction – Non-compliance with condition precedent to exercise of statutory jurisdiction – Consequences for validity of exercise of jurisdiction – Where appellant's visa cancelled under s 501(3A) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Where delegate of Minister decided under s 501CA(4) not to revoke original decision – Where appellant's migration agent applied to Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("Tribunal") for review of delegate's decision – Where s 29(1)(c) of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) provides that application to Tribunal for review of decision "must contain a statement of the reasons for the application" – Where application made by appellant's migration agent contained no statement of reasons for application – Whether non-compliance with requirement of s 29(1)(c) resulted in invalidity of application such that jurisdiction of Tribunal to review decision not engaged – Whether legislative purpose to invalidate application and deprive Tribunal of jurisdiction for want of compliance with requirement of s 29(1)(c).

Words and phrases – "application for review of a decision", "capricious", "condition precedent to the exercise of a statutory jurisdiction", "imperative language", "imperative term", "insufficient statement of reasons", "jurisdiction", "legislative history", "legislative intention", "legislative purpose", "mechanism for review", "must contain", "non-compliance", "permissive term", "statement of the reasons for the application", "statutory context", "statutory scheme".

Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) – s 36.

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) – ss 2A, 29(1)(a), 29(1)(b), 29(1)(c), 29AB, 33(1)(b), 33(2A)(a), 40(1)(a), 42A(5)(b), 43(1), 43(6), 69C.

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Amendment Act 2005 (Cth) – Sch 1, item 95.

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – ss 500(1)(ba), 500(6B), 501G(1).