DAVID (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa, Subclass 186, by the applicant, David. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant's son met the health criteria, specifically Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4007, as required for the permanent visa. The decision was made by Penelope Hunter, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's son was free from tuberculosis, free from a disease or condition that posed a threat to public health or the Australian community, and free from a disease or condition that would likely require significant health care or community services, resulting in substantial cost to the Australian community or prejudice to the access of Australian citizens or permanent residents to such services. The Tribunal also considered whether the waiver provisions under PIC 4007(2) were applicable.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant's son had been assessed as having moderate intellectual impairment, the specific requirements of PIC 4007(1)(a), (b), and (c) needed to be addressed. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that for permanent visa applications, the exemption in PIC 4007(1B) did not apply. The Tribunal found that the applicant's son met PIC 4007(2)(b) for the purposes of clause 186.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which relates to the waiver of health requirements.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the third applicant, Miguel Mariano David, met the specified criteria under PIC 4007(2)(b). The Tribunal indicated that the other visa applicants had met PIC 4007, and the Minister was to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.