Claimant’s Appeal Against Deportation Liability Dismissed Due to Late Filing

OUTCOME: Dismissed

IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL NEW ZEALAND [2026] NZIPT 507253 [NAME], [NAME]

Appellant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment

Before: [NAME] (Member)

Representative for the Appellant: [redacted]

Counsel for the Respondent: [redacted] 30 April 2026

__________________________________________________________________ DEPORTATION (NON-RESIDENT)

DECISION __________________________________________________________________ [1] This is a humanitarian appeal by the appellant, a 42-year-old citizen of [APPELLANT], against her liability for deportation which arose when she became [NAME] in New Zealand. THE ISSUE [2] The primary issue on appeal is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s humanitarian appeal, having regard to when she became [NAME] present, the withdrawal of her request for reconsideration, and the time at which she lodged her appeal. [3] For the reasons set out below, the Tribunal finds that the appeal was lodged out of time, so it does not have jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

2

BACKGROUND [4] The following information has been garnered by the Tribunal from Immigration New Zealand’s records pertaining to the appellant and her immediate family members, although it should be noted that obtaining a clear picture of the appellant and her family’s immigration history has been complicated by various changes of name and amended familial relationships. However, what this information does disclose is that the appellant has a far greater and lengthier nexus to New Zealand than the evidence presented to the Tribunal initially indicated. [5] The appellant was born in [APPELLANT] in 1983. She has a New Zealand citizen sister, and her mother is a New Zealand permanent resident. She also has two biological daughters who were adopted by a New Zealand family member in 2012. On appeal, the appellant provides evidence that indicates she has a further three siblings who are New Zealand citizens or residents. Travel History in New Zealand [6] In late 2005, the appellant first travelled to New Zealand as a visitor and returned to [APPELLANT] in early 2007. [7] In mid-2016, the appellant arrived in New Zealand as the holder of a limited visa. Immigration New Zealand was told that she wished to accompany her son, who had been legally adopted by a family member, to New Zealand, before she returned to her other children in [APPELLANT]. Once here, the appellant successfully sought visitor visas, the last of which expired in mid-2017. Thereafter, she remained [NAME] present in New Zealand for the next five years. [8] Between mid-2022 and late 2023, the appellant attempted to regularise her unlawful status through requests for a work visa as an exception to instructions pursuant to section 61 of the Immigration Act 2009 (the Act) and by seeking ministerial intervention, all of which were unsuccessful. In early 2024, she was instructed by Immigration New Zealand to depart New Zealand before compliance action was undertaken and she would be served with a deportation order. [9] On 30 June 2024, the appellant departed New Zealand to [APPELLANT].

3 Return to [APPELLANT] [10] On 18 July 2024, from [APPELLANT], the appellant applied for a visitor visa which Immigration New Zealand declined the same month. [11] In early September 2024, the appellant was issued a passport in her current name, which she used for all subsequent visa applications. Immigration New Zealand’s electronic records indicate that it was unaware the appellant had an immigration history under a different identity. [12] On 17 September 2024, the appellant applied unsuccessfully for a work visa under the Religious Worker instructions. The organisation sponsoring the application was overseen by the appellant’s brother-in-law. Immigration New Zealand declined this application in December 2024. [13] On 1 March 2025, the appellant applied for a visitor visa. The application was sponsored by one of her daughters, and the appellant declared an intended stay in New Zealand of one month or less. The application was accompanied by letters from relatives in [APPELLANT], who confirmed that the appellant sought a short visit before returning to her extensive commitments in [APPELLANT]. The visitor visa application form included the following three questions: if the appellant had ever used any other names; if she had previously applied for a New Zealand visa; and if she had ever travelled to New Zealand. To each question, the appellant declared “no”. Re-entry to New Zealand and Consequent Deportation Liability [14] On 20 March 2025, the appellant arrived in New Zealand as the holder of a one-month visitor visa. [15] On 10 April 2025, the appellant applied for a work visa as a religious worker (involving the same position and sponsoring organisation as her earlier application). [16] On 21 April 2025, Immigration New Zealand granted the appellant an interim visa, to preserve her lawful status following the expiry of her visitor visa (20 April 2025) and while awaiting a decision on her work visa. [17] During its assessment of the work visa application, Immigration New Zealand’s raised several concerns with the appellant, including the financial ability of the sponsoring organisation to meet its obligations as a sponsor; and that

4 the appellant’s employment agreement was not compliant with New Zealand employment and immigration law. After considering the appellant’s response to its concerns, Immigration New Zealand declined the work visa application on 22 May 2025. [18] In the decline decision, the appellant was informed that she may be able to request a reconsideration of the decision, provided that (among other criteria) she was lawfully in New Zealand and made this request no later than 14 days after receiving the decline decision. The appellant was also advised of her liability for deportation and appeal rights, as follows: You were granted an interim visa while awaiting a decision on your work visa application. The expiry date of your interim visa is 12 June 2025. If you remain in New Zealand after your visa expires, you will be [NAME] in New Zealand and will be liable for deportation. If this happens, your unlawfulness and liability for deportation will begin on the second day after the expiry date of your interim visa. … If you do not request reconsideration of our decision to decline you a visa, you may appeal against your liability for deportation on humanitarian grounds no later than 42 days after first becoming [NAME] in New Zealand. If you do request reconsideration of our decision to decline you a visa, you may appeal against your liability for deportation on humanitarian grounds up to the later of either: • 42 days after first being [NAME] in New Zealand, or • 42 days after receiving the decision to decline your reconsideration request (if your request is declined) [19] On 6 June 2025, the appellant made her reconsideration request to Immigration New Zealand. [20] On 12 June 2025, the appellant’s interim visa expired. She became [NAME] present in New Zealand on 14 June 2025. [21] During June and July 2025, Immigration New Zealand undertook its reconsideration assessment. This appears to have largely involved seeking comment and further evidence from the appellant in respect of the concerns identified in its decline decision. In response, Immigration New Zealand was advised that there were difficulties providing all the information sought from the sponsoring organisation, that the appellant had a new (the current) representative, and that an extension of time was necessary. Immigration New Zealand ultimately advised that a response to its concerns was required by 10 July 2025.

5 [22] On 9 July 2025, the appellant withdrew her request that Immigration New Zealand reconsider its decision on her visa application. [23] On 11 July 2025, Immigration New Zealand acknowledged the withdrawal of the appellant’s work visa reconsideration request. Its letter relevantly stated: It is also important to note that as you have withdrawn your application, you have no right of appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal. Liability for deportation and appeal rights The expiry date of your most recent visa was 12 June 2025. On the second day after this expiry date you became unlawful in New Zealand and liable for deportation. You must arrange to leave New Zealand immediately. If you do not leave voluntarily before you are served with a deportation order, you may be prohibited from returning to New Zealand in the future. You may appeal against your liability for deportation on humanitarian grounds no later than 42 days after first being [NAME] in New Zealand. [24] On 29 July 2025, the appellant purported to lodge this appeal against her liability for deportation with the Tribunal. STATUTORY TIMEFRAME [25] The appellant’s liability for deportation arose when she became [NAME] in New Zealand. This was the result of Immigration New Zealand having declined her application for a further temporary visa (the religious worker work visa), which then saw her interim visa expire. [26] As a temporary visa applicant whose application was declined whilst she was still lawfully in New Zealand, section 185 of the Act provides the appellant with a right of reconsideration of the decline decision: 185 Right of reconsideration if onshore application for further temporary visa declined (1) This section applies to a holder of a temporary visa if— (a) the holder of the temporary visa (the applicant) is onshore and applies during the currency of that visa for a further temporary visa; and (b) the application for the further temporary visa is declined; and (c) …

6 (2) The applicant may apply in the prescribed manner for a reconsideration of the decision to decline a further visa if, and only if,— (a) the application for reconsideration is made not later than 14 days after the date on which the applicant received notice of the decision to decline the further visa; and (b) the applicant is still lawfully in New Zealand at the time of the application for reconsideration. (3) … (4) If the decision to decline the visa application is confirmed and no visa is granted following reconsideration under this section, an immigration officer must inform the applicant, in writing, of— (a) the decision; and (b) in the case of an applicant who still holds a visa, the date on which the person will have an obligation to leave New Zealand; and (c) in the case of an applicant who no longer holds a visa,— (i) the fact that the person is already obliged to leave New Zealand; and (ii) the fact that the person may appeal on humanitarian grounds against his or her liability for deportation not later than 42 days after the date on which the person received confirmation of the decision to decline the visa application. (5) The result of any reconsideration under this section of a decision to decline an application for a further temporary visa is final and conclusive, and no further application for reconsideration of that decision may be made. (6) The fact that an application for reconsideration has been made under this section does not of itself entitle the applicant to remain in New Zealand after the expiry of the applicant’s current temporary visa, but, until the application for reconsideration has been determined or withdrawn, the person may not be deported. [27] Section 154 of the Act sets out the appellant’s right of appeal and the timeframe for making an appeal: 154 Deportation liability if [NAME] (1) A [NAME] is liable for deportation. (2) A [NAME] may, not later than 42 days after first becoming [NAME] in New Zealand, appeal on humanitarian grounds against his or her liability for deportation. (3) Subsection (2) applies except if subsection (4) or (5) applies. (4) If the person is [NAME] in New Zealand following an unsuccessful reconsideration under section 185 of a decision to decline his or her visa application, the person may appeal on humanitarian grounds against his or her liability for deportation not later than 42 days after the later of— (a) the day on which the person became [NAME] in New Zealand; or

7 (b) the day on which the person received confirmation of the decision to decline his or her visa application. (5) … DISCUSSION [28] Turning to the facts in this case, the appellant requested a reconsideration of Immigration New Zealand’s decision to decline her temporary visa application of 22 May 2025. She made this request on 6 June 2025, within the 14-day timeframe after receiving notice of the decision (excluding a public holiday per section 6 of the Act) and when she was lawfully in New Zealand: section 185(2) of the Act. [29] While awaiting the reconsideration, the appellant’s interim visa expired and she became [NAME] present and consequently liable for deportation, on 14 June 2025. At that time, the appellant had a right of appeal to this Tribunal against her liability for deportation. Section 154(4) of the Act mandated that she appeal not later than 42 days after one of the following ‘triggering events’ had occurred (and whichever was the later): (a) the day that she became [NAME] in New Zealand; or (b) the day she received confirmation of Immigration New Zealand’s decision to decline her visa application. [30] On 9 July 2025, the appellant withdrew her reconsideration request. Consequently, Immigration New Zealand did not determine the reconsideration, and it did not confirm (or reverse) the decision to decline her visa application. Clearly, the appellant did not receive (on a reconsideration) confirmation of the decision to decline her visa application, which would have triggered a 42-day appeal timeframe, under section 154(4)(b) of the Act. [31] The withdrawal of the request for reconsideration left the appellant with an appeal timeframe of 42 days after she had become [NAME] in New Zealand: section 154(2) of the Act. This was the only triggering event that then applied to her circumstances.

8 Certified to be the Research Copy released for publication.

[NAME] Member [32] The Tribunal finds that the time for lodgement of an appeal by the appellant was 28 July 2025: being 42 days after 14 June 2025 (excluding a public holiday). This was the last day that the Act permitted an appeal to be filed with the Tribunal. The appellant purported to lodge her appeal on 29 July 2025. [33] The Act does not give the Tribunal power to extend the timeframe to lodge an appeal. [34] Immigration New Zealand accurately informed the appellant of her right of appeal and the associated timeframes through its letters declining her work visa and acknowledging her reconsideration withdrawal. Its latter letter specifically advised the appellant that, as she had withdrawn her reconsideration, she had no right of appeal to the Tribunal (see [23] above). [35] It appears that the appellant may have failed to note that, by withdrawing her reconsideration request, rather than waiting for Immigration New Zealand’s determination (at which point she would have had 42 days from receipt from this determination), the 42-day appeal period ran from the earlier time that she became [NAME] in New Zealand.

CONCLUSION [36] The appeal is out of time. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider it. Order as to Depersonalised Research Copy [37] Pursuant to clause 19 of Schedule 2 of the Immigration Act 2009, the Tribunal orders that, until further order, the research copy of this decision is to be depersonalised by removal of the appellant’s name and any particulars likely to lead to the identification of the appellant. This is because the decision records prejudicial information of a personal nature regarding the appellant’s immigration history. “[NAME]” [NAME] Member