ICO Asiapacific Australia Pty Ltd (Migration)

[2023] AATA 3347

ICO Asiapacific Australia Pty Ltd (Migration) [2023] AATA 3347 (6 September 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REVIEW APPLICANT:  ICO Asiapacific Australia Pty Ltd

VISA APPLICANTS:  Ms Norilyn Katigbak Tagle
Miss Khate Georgia Tagle
Miss Kylee Gidgette Tagle

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Ernest Ng (MARN: 1387964)

CASE NUMBER:  2101403

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2020/554165

MEMBER:Sheridan Aster

DATE:6 September 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicants meet Public Interest Criterion 4021 for the purposes of cl 482.317(1) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

Statement made on 06 September 2023 at 9:51am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION –Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa – Subclass 482– person with standing to apply for a review was the nominating employer – Tribunal remitted Mr Tagle’s separate application – applicants meet Public Interest Criterion 4021 – all three passports are valid at the date of this decision – decision under review remitted  

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cls 482.223, 482.317, Schedule 4

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 GK – Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. On 24 February 2020, the visa applicants applied for Subclass 482 visas as secondary applicants to Mr Rigor Mangalino Tagle. All applicants are members of the same family unit.

3. On 19 January 2021, a delegate of the Minister found that Mr Tagle did not meet the English language requirements. The visas for the secondary applicants were refused on the basis that they did not meet the requirements of cl 482.312 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations), which requires that the applicant is a member of the family unit of a person who is the holder of a Subclass 457 or a Subclass 482 visa.

4. The visa applicants in the current matter were offshore at that time. As such, the person with standing to apply for a review of the decisions in respect to their applications was the nominating employer.

5. On 30 August 2023, the Tribunal remitted Mr Tagle’s separate application with a direction that he met the requirements of cl 482.223 of Schedule to the Regulations.

6. The Tribunal cannot remit the current matter with a finding on the criteria upon which the visas were refused. It is not possible to find that they are members of the family unit of someone who holds a 457 or 482 visa at this stage because the Department needs to assess the remaining criteria for the grant of a visa to Mr Tagle.

7. In order to facilitate the processing of the current visa applications with that of Mr Tagle, the Tribunal has elected to remit the application with a direction on an uncontentious clause.

8. Clause 482.317(1) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations requires the applicants to meet Public Interest Criterion 4021 of Schedule 4 to the Regulations. Public Interest Criterion 4021 provides that the visa applicant must hold a valid passport unless it would be unreasonable to require the visa applicant to hold a passport.

9. On 5 September 2023, the representative provided a copy of the identification pages of the passports issued to the visa applicants by the Republic of the Philippines. All three passports are valid at the date of this decision.  

   DECISION

10. The Tribunal remits the applications for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicants meet Public Interest Criterion 4021 for the purposes of cl 482.317(1) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

    Sheridan Aster
    Member