Bu (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the application of Ms Bu for a Skilled (Residence) (Class VB) visa, specifically a Subclass 887 visa. The central dispute concerned whether Ms Bu had resided in a specified regional area for a total of at least two years while holding a qualifying visa, as required by the migration regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine the meaning of "specified regional area" in the context of Ms Bu's application and to assess whether her claimed periods of residence in Australia, as evidenced by her visa application and departmental records, satisfied the two-year residency requirement. This involved scrutinising the dates of her entries and departures from Australia, her declared addresses, and the relevant ministerial instruments defining specified regional areas.

The Tribunal reasoned that the definition of a "specified regional area" depended on the specific visa held by the applicant. In Ms Bu's case, as she relied on a Subclass 489 visa, the relevant definition referred to areas specified by the Minister in IMMI 12/015. While the postcodes provided for Geelong and Strathfieldsaye were specified regional areas, the Tribunal noted discrepancies in Ms Bu's claimed start dates for her residence in Strathfieldsaye and the fact that she had provided a non-regional address (Point Cook) on multiple incoming passenger cards. These inconsistencies raised questions about the accuracy of her claimed periods of residence in a specified regional area.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration, directing that Ms Bu met the criteria under cl 887.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, indicating that further assessment of the residency requirement was necessary.