Maudsley (Migration)

[2023] AATA 4455

Maudsley (Migration) [2023] AATA 4455 (16 November 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Colin Maudsley
Ms Lindsay Jayne Maudsley

CASE NUMBER:  2315395

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2023/3634303

MEMBER:Mary Sheargold

DATE:16 November 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 408 visa:

·Reg 2.03AA(2) as required by Public Interest Criterion 4001 for the purposes of cl 408.216 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 16 November 2023 at 5:25pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Activity (Class GG) visa – Subclass 408 (Temporary Activity) – character test – statement from an appropriate authority – Digital National Police Certificate: Immigration/Citizenship – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 2.03AA; Schedule 2, cl 408.216; Schedule 4, PIC 4001

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 Temporary Activity (Class GG) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). The applicants applied for the visas on 27 June 2023. The delegate refused to grant the visas on 25 September 2023.

2. The delegate made the decision on the basis that evidence of criminal history was not provided as required to satisfy a criterion for the grant of the visa under the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations).

3. On 5 October 2023, the Tribunal received a copy of the Digital National Police Certificate: Immigration/Citizenship – Australia for the first named applicant in fulfilment of the requirement in reg 2.03AA(2).  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, including in relation to the secondary applicant.

4. In reaching its decision the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicants on the basis of the material before it, pursuant to s 360(2)(a) of the Act.

   DECISION

5. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 408 visa:

   ·Reg 2.03AA(2) as required by Public Interest Criterion 4001 for the purposes of cl 408.216 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

   Mary Sheargold
   Member