Mohammed Abdul Sayeed (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal regarding a Subclass 186 Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa. The primary applicant, Mr Mohammed Abdul Sayeed, had his visa application refused because one of his children, a secondary applicant, failed to meet Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4007. Specifically, a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth had determined that providing health or community services to the child would likely result in significant cost to the Australian community.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether it was reasonable to require Mr Sayeed's son to meet PIC 4007, given that the son was no longer a visa applicant in the context of the review and that Mr Sayeed had been residing in Australia alone for an extended period. The core legal issue revolved around the application and potential waiver of PIC 4007, which mandates that applicants be free from diseases or conditions that would likely require significant health or community services, thereby imposing a substantial cost on the Australian community.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the son's visa application had been finally determined, the question of whether Mr Sayeed should be required to have his son undergo assessment for PIC 4007 was central to the review. The Tribunal noted that Mr Sayeed had been in Australia for over seven years without his family, and it was argued that it would be unreasonable to prevent him from remaining in Australia due to the requirement for a non-migrating child to undergo assessment. The Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration, directing that Mr Sayeed met PIC 4007(2)(b) for the purposes of sub-regulation 186.224, which allows for a waiver of the requirements of paragraph (1)(c) if the Minister is satisfied that granting the visa would be unlikely to result in undue cost to the Australian community.