Outcomes of decisions made by Members of the AAT

Caitlin made this Freedom of Information request to Administrative Review Tribunal

1 follower

The request was successful.

Dear Administrative Appeals Tribunal,

Eight categories, and respective subcategories, of information are sought, as follows:

Decisions made by Ms Kira Raif:

1. Category 1: The total number of cases finalised by Ms Kira Raif in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, for each calendar year starting from the year when her first case was finalised.

a. Subcategory of Category 1: Out of the number in Category 1, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

2. Category 2: The total number of cases finalised by Ms Kira Raif in the General Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal where what was reviewed were decisions made under Part 9 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), for each calendar year starting from the year when her first case was finalised.

a. Subcategory of Category 2: Out of the number in Category 2, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

3. Category 3: The total number of cases finalised by Ms Kira Raif in the Migration Review Tribunal, for each calendar year starting from the year when her first case was finalised.

a. Subcategory of Category 3: Out of the number in Category 3, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

4. Category 4: The total number of cases finalised by Ms Kira Raif in the Refugee Review Tribunal, for each calendar year starting from the year when her first case was finalised.

a. Subcategory of Category 4: Out of the number in Category 4, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

Decisions made by decision-makers other than Ms Kira Raif:

5. Category 5: The total number of cases finalised by decision-makers other than Ms Kira Raif in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, for each calendar year contemplated by Category 1.

a. Subcategory of Category 5: Out of the number in Category 5, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

6. Category 6: The total number of cases finalised by decision-makers other than Ms Kira Raif in the General Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal where what was reviewed were decisions made under Part 9 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), for each calendar year contemplated by Category 2.

a. Subcategory of Category 6: Out of the number in Category 6, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

7. Category 7: The total number of cases finalised by decision-makers other than Ms Kira Raif in the Migration Review Tribunal, for each calendar year contemplated by Category 3.

a. Subcategory of Category 7: Out of the number in Category 7, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

8. Category 8: The total number of cases finalised by decision-makers other than Ms Kira Raif in the Refugee Review Tribunal, for each calendar year contemplated by Category 4.

a. Subcategory of Category 8: Out of the number in Category 8, the total number of cases where the decisions under review were not affirmed, for each such calendar year.

The FOI applicant further notes as follows:

a. The word “finalised” above:

A) when used in categories 1 to 4, refers to cases finalised by Ms Raif where she was the only decision-maker (i.e. where the Tribunal in question was constituted only by Ms Raif), whether as a Member or Senior Member;

B) refers to final/substantive (i.e. not procedural, such as whether to issue a subpoena or call a witness to give evidence) review decisions made;

C) excludes decisions made under section 362B of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth);

D) excludes decisions made under section 426A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth);

E) excludes decisions made under section 42A of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth);

F) excludes cases finalised by reason of the respective review applications being withdrawn by the review applicant (this exclusion was ignored in the disclosure contained in FOI reference 2023/0104);

G) excludes cases finalised by reason of the respective review applications being withdrawn on behalf of a review applicant;

H) excludes cases finalised by reason of any review application fee (whether or not it was reduced by the Tribunal) not having been paid;

I) excludes cases finalised by reason of the review application been lodged through an invalid lodgement method;

J) excludes cases finalised by reason of there being no primary decision for review;

K) excludes cases finalised by reason of there being no Tribunal-reviewable decision;

L) excludes outcomes described by footnote #5 of the disclosure contained in FOI reference 2023/0104 as follows:

i. “Fee not waived/reduced and not paid”;

ii. “Invalid lodgement method”;

iii. “No primary decision for review”;

iv. “No Tribunal-reviewable decision”;

v. “Timeframes not met”.

M) excludes cases finalised by consent of one or more parties;

N) excludes outcomes described by footnote #7 of by the disclosure contained in FOI reference 2023/0104:

i. “by consent”; and

ii. “By consent …”; and

iii. “Other”.

O) excludes decisions involving a finding that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction, whether for reason of the review application being filed after any statutory deadlines, by being filed by someone who was unauthorised to file a review application or otherwise;

P) includes only decisions which include one or more of the following outcomes:

i. decisions affirming the decision under review;

ii. decisions setting aside the decision under review;

iii. decisions varying the decision under review;

iv. decisions substituting another decision for the decision under review;

v. decisions remitting the matter to the original decision-maker, with or without a direction to the original decision-maker;

Q) refers only to final/substantive (i.e. not procedural, such as whether to issue a subpoena or call a witness to give evidence) review decisions made (this is similar, but not the same, as item a(B));

b. If, for example, Ms Raif made decisions from 2006 until 2023 (inclusive), the answers sought would be as follows, with the terms ‘A’, ‘AA’, ‘B’, ‘BB’ … ‘CC’ below representing the respective number of decisions:

o Category 1 (decisions in the Migration and Refugee Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal):

 2006: A decisions

 2007: B decisions

 …

 2023: C decisions

o Subcategory of Category 1:

 2006: AA decisions

 2007: BB decisions

 …

 2023: CC decisions

c. The same rationale discussed in item (b) above applies to categories 2 to 8 and their respective subcategories.

d. The ellipses used above do not indicate that the information is not sought for years 2008 to 2002 (inclusive). On the contrary, the information is sought for those years too.

Yours faithfully,

Siobhan

OFFICIAL
Dear Siobhan,

I refer to your FOI request below. I note that this request appears identical to one lodged on 2 May 2023, the document for which was released in full to you on 19 June 2023.

Please advise if you would like me to send the FOI decision and released document again.

If you made the below subsequent request in error, kindly confirm that you withdraw.

Please contact me if you have any questions.

Kind regards,

Marta
Policy Officer

Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Principal Registry, Melbourne
Legal & Policy

http://www.aat.gov.au/

-----Original Message-----
From: Caitlin <[FOI #10414 email]>
Sent: Friday, 30 June 2023 5:50 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Outcomes of decisions made by Members of the AAT

EXTERNAL EMAIL
"Do not click any links or open any attachments unless you trust the sender, are expecting this email and know the content is safe.”