Butler (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Butler for a Subclass 417 Working Holiday visa. Mr Butler had previously held a Subclass 417 visa and applied for a further visa on 21 February 2016. The primary dispute revolved around whether Mr Butler had satisfied the requirement to have carried out specified work in regional Australia for at least three months as a holder of a previous Working Holiday visa. The Tribunal was tasked with determining if Mr Butler had provided a bogus document or misleading information in relation to his application, and if so, whether the relevant criteria should be waived.

The legal issues before the Tribunal included whether Mr Butler had provided a bogus document or false or misleading information in relation to his visa application or a previous visa application within the preceding 12 months. If such a document or information was provided, the Tribunal also had to consider whether the requirements of clause 4020(1) or (2) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth) should be waived. Further, the Tribunal was required to assess if Mr Butler met the identity requirements and if a visa had previously been refused based on a failure to satisfy clause 4020(2A).

The Tribunal found that Mr Butler had not met the criteria for the grant of the visa. In his application, Mr Butler stated his usual occupation was construction and that he intended to seek employment in the construction industry. He provided documentation, including a Form 1263, indicating he had undertaken construction, painting, and maintenance work between 2 June 2015 and 3 March 2016. However, a letter of support submitted with a separate form indicated he was working as a Food and Beverage attendant since 2 June 2015. Upon inquiry, a departmental representative confirmed with the signatory of that letter that Mr Butler was indeed employed as a Food and Beverage attendant and not in the maintenance department. This discrepancy led the Tribunal to conclude that Mr Butler had provided misleading information regarding his employment.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr Butler a Subclass 417 Working Holiday visa.