Cox (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking review of a decision not to grant a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, Subclass 417. The central dispute concerned whether the applicant had completed the required six months of "specified Subclass 417 work" in regional Australia.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 417 visa, specifically whether they had undertaken at least six months of specified Subclass 417 work on or after 1 July 2019, while holding the relevant visa, and had been remunerated in accordance with Australian law. The definition of "specified Subclass 417 work" and the relevant legislative instrument, LIN 20/182, were also central to the determination.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant had not met the visa requirements. This conclusion was based on the applicant's failure to provide requested information to both the Department and the Tribunal regarding their claimed specified work. Despite multiple invitations and extensions, the applicant did not submit substantive evidence to support their claim of having completed the required six months of work. The applicant's explanation that they believed they had provided relevant evidence was insufficient, as they could not provide specific details about the evidence or explain their non-response to specific requests.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa.