Hadi (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457, where the primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant possessed the necessary skills, qualifications, and employment background to perform the nominated occupation of Glazier, as required by clause 457.223(4)(da) and potentially clause 457.223(4)(e) of the Migration Regulations 1994. The case was heard by Catherine Carney-Orsborn.

The core legal issues before the Tribunal were to determine if the applicant had adequately demonstrated the skills and qualifications necessary for the role of a Glazier, particularly in light of concerns raised about the validity of a Certificate IV in Glass and Glazing obtained from an organisation that had been suspended. The Tribunal was also required to consider whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of their employment background and the nature of their training and experience in the occupation.

The Tribunal considered evidence including the applicant's testimony, employer corroboration, and a contractor's licence. However, significant concerns arose regarding the applicant's claimed Certificate IV, as the issuing institution was suspended. The Tribunal issued a letter under s359A, requiring a skills assessment from a properly qualified organisation. Subsequently, the applicant provided a Certificate III in Glass and Glazing and a general skills assessment from Gimbal Construction, an RTO approved by the Department of Home Affairs for skills assessments. Despite these later submissions, the Tribunal found that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met criterion cl.457.223(4)(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.