Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00800:section:494e:p2
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00800
Segment Type: section
Provision Reference: s 494E (pt 2/2)
Character Range: 1237201–1239369

substantial prejudice to Andrew's right to seek review, it is intended that subsection (2) would apply in relation to the notice given to Andrew.
 George makes an application for review of the refusal decision 29 days after receiving the notice. The misstatement in the notice causes substantial prejudice to George's right to seek review as the application for review is not made within the required period but is made within the misstated period specified in the notice. It is intended that subsection (2) would not apply in relation to the notice given to George.
 Daniel makes an application for review of the refusal decision 40 days after receiving the notice. The misstatement in the notice does not cause substantial prejudice to Daniel's right to seek review as the application for review is made well after the required period. It is intended that subsection (2) would apply in relation to the notice given to Daniel.
Example 2: Anne applies for a visa and has an authorised recipient under section 494D. The Minister refuses to grant Anne the visa and gives notice of the refusal decision by sending an email to the authorised recipient. The authorised recipient receives the notice and 2 days later forwards it on to Anne.
 The notice states that Anne may make an application for review of the refusal decision within 21 days after the day Anne receives the notice. The notice does not explain that the effect of sections 494C and 494D is that the period of 21 days begins to run on the day after the day the notice is received by the authorised recipient, rather than by Anne.
 While the notice substantially complies with the requirement in the Act to state the period within which an application for review must be made, the notice misdescribes when that period begins to run.
 Anne makes an application for review of the refusal decision 35 days after receiving the notice. The misdescription in the notice does not cause substantial prejudice to Anne's right to seek review as the application for review is made well after the required period. It is intended that subsection (2) would apply in relation to the notice given to the authorised recipient.