Kamaruddin (Migration)
[2018] AATA 1941
•9 May 2018
Kamaruddin (Migration) [2018] AATA 1941 (9 May 2018)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT: Mr Mohamad Kamarul Ariffin Bin Kamaruddin
CASE NUMBER: 1802503
DIBP REFERENCE(S): BCC2018/340197 PNJ
MEMBER:M. Edgoose
DATE:9 May 2018
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne, Victoria
DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 visa:
·cl.500.215 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations
Statement made on 09 May 2018 at 10:07am
CATCHWORDS
Migration – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – Evidence of Health insurance – Decision under review remittedLEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2 cl 500.215STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The applicant applied for the visa on 21 January 2018. The delegate refused to grant the visa on 23 January 2018.
The delegate made the decision on the basis that evidence of adequate health insurance was not provided as required to satisfy a criterion for the grant of the visa under the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations).
The applicant has since provided the Tribunal with documentation evidencing that she now has adequate health insurance (AAT folio 13-14) In light of the new evidence received, the Tribunal is satisfied that the criterion is met and has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.
DECISION
The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 visa:
·cl.500.215 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations
M. Edgoose
Member
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
0
0
0