Lakod (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the applications of Lakod and another applicant for Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas, specifically Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visas. The dispute centred on whether the first applicant had provided a satisfactory statement from an appropriate authority regarding his criminal history, as required by migration regulations.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the first applicant had satisfied regulation 2.03AA(2)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates the provision of a statement from an appropriate authority evidencing whether the applicant has a criminal history. This requirement was crucial for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa.

The Tribunal reasoned that while an initial Australian Federal Police (AFP) Complete Disclosure certificate was provided, it was deemed unacceptable by the Department because the name on the certificate did not match the applicant's passport. However, a subsequent AFP Complete Disclosure certificate, dated 29 June 2020 and containing the applicant's correct names, was provided to the Tribunal. This certificate confirmed that the first applicant had no disclosable court outcomes. The Tribunal concluded that this later certificate constituted the required statement from an appropriate authority, thereby satisfying regulation 2.03AA(2)(a).

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the applications for the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the first named applicant be considered to meet the criteria under regulation 2.03AA(2)(a) for a Subclass 485 visa.