Bah (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, with Ms Katie Malyon presiding as a Member. The applicant, Mrs Bah, sought review of a decision concerning her application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 309. The central dispute revolved around whether Mrs Bah had provided sufficient evidence of her criminal history, specifically in relation to requirements under the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided a statement from an appropriate authority that evidenced whether or not she had a criminal history, as required by regulation 2.03AA(2)(a) of the Migration Regulations. A secondary issue considered was whether the requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2)(b) applied, which related to the provision of a completed approved Form 80.

The Tribunal reasoned that Mrs Bah had provided two signed Clearance Certificates issued by the Sierra Leone Police, dated 14 August 2023 and 15 August 2023, in respect of herself and her daughter, Haja Yayeh Sorie Bah. These certificates confirmed that neither individual had a criminal record in Sierra Leone. The Tribunal found that these certificates constituted statements from the appropriate authority, thereby satisfying regulation 2.03AA(2)(a). Furthermore, the Tribunal noted there was no evidence that a request for a completed Form 80 had been made by the original delegate, meaning regulation 2.03AA(2)(b) was not applicable.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mrs Bah met the criteria under regulation 2.03AA(2). The Tribunal remitted the applications for Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visas for reconsideration, with a direction that the first named visa applicant met the specified criteria.