1928904 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa (Subclass 187) by a citizen of [Country 1]. The applicant was nominated by [Employer] for the occupation of [Occupation]. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4005, which requires an applicant to be free from diseases or conditions that could result in significant costs to the Australian community. The Tribunal was tasked with reviewing the decision to refuse the visa.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of PIC 4005, specifically subclause (1)(c)(ii)(A), which relates to the potential for a disease or condition to result in a significant cost to the Australian community through healthcare and community services. This assessment was complicated by a policy change that increased the threshold for "significant cost" to $49,000 and reduced the time period for estimating costs to a maximum of 10 years.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review because the applicant did not satisfy PIC 4005. A Medical Officer of the Commonwealth (MOC) initially opined that the applicant did not meet the criterion on 18 April 2019. Following a policy update on 1 July 2019, which adjusted the significant cost threshold and estimation period, the applicant's case was reassessed. A subsequent MOC opinion on 16 August 2019, based on the updated policy, also found that the applicant did not meet the health requirements under subregulation 187.235(1) and PIC 4005(1)(c)(ii)(A). Despite the applicant requesting a further opinion, a report dated 29 November 2019 confirmed the applicant's failure to meet the criterion. Consequently, as the applicant did not satisfy PIC 4005, they also did not satisfy the requirements of clause 187.235 of the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa.