Maulit (Migration)

The Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Skilled Independent (Permanent) visa (Subclass 189). The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the points test criterion for the visa, specifically concerning the qualifying score and the provision of required information within the prescribed period.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's assessed score met or exceeded the qualifying score stipulated for the visa, and whether the applicant had provided all necessary information to substantiate their claims. This involved an assessment of the applicant's qualifications against the criteria prescribed in Schedule 6D to the Regulations and the relevant legislative instruments, considering the points test as it applied at the time of the delegate's assessment and at the time of the Tribunal's assessment, applying whichever was more favourable to the applicant.

The Tribunal reasoned that points are awarded for various attributes, including age and English language proficiency. While the applicant, aged 27 at the time of invitation, was entitled to 30 points for age, they failed to provide evidence of their English language proficiency. Despite claiming "Proficient English" based on a Pearson Test of English Academic (PTE Academic) taken on 9 August 2019, the applicant did not submit the test report form or any other supporting documentation to the Department or the Tribunal. Consequently, the Tribunal could not award points for English language proficiency.

As the applicant was only awarded points for age, their total score was 30 points, which was less than the qualifying score. Therefore, the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for the Skilled Independent (Permanent) visa. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.