1601770 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, subclass 417. The applicant sought to have a decision not to grant the visa reviewed. The core of the dispute concerned whether the applicant had completed the requisite period of specified work in regional Australia, a condition for obtaining the visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had satisfied clause 417.211 of the Migration Regulations, which mandates at least three months of specified work in regional Australia while holding a Working Holiday visa. This involved assessing the credibility and sufficiency of the evidence provided by the applicant to substantiate her claim of employment with Four Seasons Labour Pty Ltd in the 2720 postcode area between April and August 2015.

The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the applicant was contradictory and insufficient to establish that she had carried out the required specified work. While the applicant provided various documents, including a Form 1263, payslips, bank statements, and a letter from her employer, the Tribunal noted discrepancies. Specifically, only three payslips were initially provided, and concerns were raised about their authenticity and whether they accurately reflected the applicant's remuneration. The bank statements did not clearly show employer wage details, and the applicant's explanation of her payment method (by quality of work rather than by hour) and the inconsistency in her reported hours of work raised doubts about whether she had worked the equivalent of full-time hours and been paid in accordance with Australian legislation. Furthermore, the bank transaction list did not adequately support her presence in the claimed work area or payments from the employer.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, concluding that she had not met the criteria stipulated in clause 417.211(5).