Pop (Migration)

[2020] AATA 4120

Pop (Migration) [2020] AATA 4120 (14 September 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Gavril Pop

CASE NUMBER:  2010984

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          CLF2007/106885

MEMBER:Helena Claringbold

DATE:14 September 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 804 visa:

·cl.804.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 14 September 2020 at 10:25am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Aged Parent (Residence) (Class BP) visa – Subclass 804 (Aged Parent) – Federal Circuit Court remittal – Assurance of Support had been accepted – new evidence received –decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 360

Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 804.224

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 Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant the applicant an Aged Parent (Residence) (Class BP) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. On 30 May 2007, the applicant applied for the visa. On 12 July 2017, The delegate refused to grant the visa. On 13 February 2019, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) affirmed the delegate’s decision.  On 5 June 2020, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia remitted the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

3. The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had provided evidence that an Assurance of Support had been accepted by Centrelink.  Therefore, the applicant did not meet cl.802.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

4. On 21 August 2020, the applicant provided the Tribunal a letter dated 18 October 2019 from Centrelink.  The letter advised that an Assurance of Support for the applicant had been accepted. Considering the new evidence received, the Tribunal is satisfied that cl.802.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations is met and has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

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

   DECISION

6. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 804 visa:

   ·cl.804.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

   Helena Claringbold
   Member