Andradi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AHT) considered the application of Mr. Andradi for a Business Skills (Residence) (Class DF) visa, specifically the Subclass 892 (State/Territory Sponsored Business Owner) visa. The dispute concerned whether Mr. Andradi had met the requirement of direct and continuous involvement in managing a qualifying business for at least two years prior to his visa application. The Tribunal was tasked with reviewing the delegate's decision to refuse the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr. Andradi's business activities, particularly his management duties while overseas and the nature of his business, satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 892 visa. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if his involvement constituted "direct and continuous involvement in managing" the business, if the business was "lawfully and actively operating," and if it was a "qualifying business" with the purpose of making a profit.

The Tribunal found that Mr. Andradi held a 70% ownership interest in a business whose purpose was to make a profit through residential construction for the public. It was satisfied that the business was lawfully and actively operating. However, the Tribunal noted that the delegate had not adequately considered the evidence regarding Mr. Andradi's continued management duties while he was overseas, nor had the delegate fully assessed whether his involvement constituted direct and continuous management. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the delegate's decision was affected by an error of law and remitted the matter for reconsideration.