CANA (Migration)

[2024] AATA 2352

CANA (Migration) [2024] AATA 2352 (24 June 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Rommel Cabansag CANA

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Hadi Assanteh (MARN: 0320689)

CASE NUMBER:  2405326

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2023/6760001

MEMBER:Sheridan Aster

DATE:24 June 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets Public Interest Criterion 4001 for the purposes of cl 408.216(1) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

Statement made on 24 June 2024 at 6:45pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Activity (Class GG) visa – Subclass 408 (Temporary Activity) – criminal history statements – certificates from Australia and home country provided to tribunal – no records reported – decision made without hearing necessary – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 360(2)(a)
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 408.216(1)

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicant a Temporary Activity (Class GG) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). The applicant applied for the visa on 22 November 2023. The delegate refused to grant the visa on 14 March 2024.

2. The delegate made the decision on the basis that evidence of criminal history was not provided as required to satisfy a criterion for the grant of the visa under the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations).

3. The applicant has since provided the Tribunal with a National Police Certificate issued by the Australian Federal Police on 13 January 2024 and a Multi-Purpose Clearance issued by the National Bureau of Investigation of the Republic of the Philippines on 12 January 2024. There were no records reported on either report.

4. In light of the new evidence received, the Tribunal is satisfied that the criterion is met and has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

5. In reaching its decision the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicant on the basis of the material before it, pursuant to s 360(2)(a) of the Act.

   DECISION

6. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets Public Interest Criterion 4001 for the purposes of cl 408.216(1) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

   Sheridan Aster
   Member