JOSHI (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa, Subclass 100. The applicant had been requested by the Department to provide a Completed Disclosure certificate and a Police Clearance Certificate from the Australian Federal Police and the Indian Government, respectively, due to concerns regarding criminal history. The applicant initially failed to respond to these requests. The decision under review was made by a delegate of the Department. The case was heard by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided a statement from an appropriate authority that evidenced whether or not she had a criminal history, as required by regulation 2.03AA of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal also considered whether a request for an approved Form 80 had been made, which would engage regulation 2.03AA(2)(b).

The Tribunal found that while the applicant initially failed to provide the requested documents, she subsequently submitted a certified copy of a National Police Certificate - Complete Disclosure from the Australian Federal Police, dated 13 June 2018, which indicated no disclosable court outcomes. Additionally, a certified copy of a Police Clearance Certificate from the Indian Government, dated 18 June 2018, was provided, certifying that there was nothing adverse against the applicant. The Tribunal concluded that these documents satisfied the requirement under regulation 2.03AA(2)(a). Furthermore, the Tribunal noted there was no evidence that the delegate had requested an approved Form 80, meaning regulation 2.03AA(2)(b) was not applicable.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the applicant be considered to meet the criteria under regulation 2.03AA(2) for a Subclass 100 visa.