Christie (Migration)

[2022] AATA 1427

Christie (Migration) [2022] AATA 1427 (9 May 2022)

CORRIGENDUM

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Nigel Peter Christie
Ms Anzelika Goloscapova
Mr Dzosua Aleksanders O'Konors-Smits
Miss Sophie Anastasia Christie
Mr Philip Peter Christie

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr James Jonathan Tobin (MARN: 1276873)

CASE NUMBER:  2120068

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/832459

MEMBER:Mary Sheargold

DATE OF DECISION:  9 May 2022

DATE CORRIGENDUM

SIGNED:18 May 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

AMENDMENT:  The following corrections are made to the decision:

The first page of the decision should include Mr Philip Peter Christie as an applicant.

Mary Sheargold
Member

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Nigel Peter Christie
Ms Anzelika Goloscapova
Mr Dzosua Aleksanders O'Konors-Smits
Miss Sophie Anastasia Christie

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr James Jonathan Tobin (MARN: 1276873)

CASE NUMBER:  2120068

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/832459

MEMBER:Mary Sheargold

DATE:9 May 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 189 visa:

·Public Interest Criterion 4007 for the purposes of cl 189.234 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 09 May 2022 at 1:17pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Skilled Independent (Permanent) (Class SI) visa – Subclass 189 (Skilled - Independent) – health criteria – evidence of required medical assessment not provided with visa application – completion of assessment confirmed by tribunal – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 189.234, Schedule 4, criterion 4007

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 applicants Skilled Independent (Permanent) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). The applicants applied for the visas on 10 January 2020. The delegate refused to grant the visas on 9 December 2021.

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

3. On 8 April 2022, the Tribunal confirmed that the first named applicant had completed his medical assessment and met the requirements in Public Interest Criterion 4007.  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, including in relation to the secondary applicants.

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

   DECISION

5. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 189 visa:

   ·Public Interest Criterion 4007 for the purposes of cl 189.234 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

   Mary Sheargold
   Member