Kalalo (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) regarding the refusal of Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas, specifically Subclass 485 visas. The applicants, identified as Mr Brian Kalalo and Ms Maggie May Kalalo (as a secondary applicant), sought review of the decision to refuse their visa applications.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant, Ms Maggie May Kalalo, had previously held a Subclass 485 visa granted on the basis that she satisfied the primary criteria for its grant, as required by clause 485.211(b) of Schedule 2 to the relevant regulations. A secondary issue arose concerning Ms Kalalo's status as a secondary applicant, which depended on whether the primary applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 485 visa.

The Tribunal reasoned that departmental records, confirmed by the applicant's admissions during the hearing, indicated that Ms Kalalo had previously been granted a Subclass 485 visa on 10 November 2014, satisfying the primary criteria. Consequently, she did not meet the requirement under clause 485.211(b) that she *not* have previously held such a visa. As this criterion was not met, Ms Kalalo did not satisfy the requirements for a Subclass 485 visa. The Tribunal further noted that as the primary applicant did not meet the criteria, the secondary applicant could not meet the secondary criteria either.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas.