Portes (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, subclass 417, before the Tribunal. The applicant sought review of a decision that found she had not carried out the requisite specified work in regional Australia. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant's work as a groom for show horses, involving the maintenance of animals for the purpose of assisting owners to sell them, constituted "specified work" as defined by the relevant legislative instrument.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant's employment at Universal Stables, where she performed duties as a groom and stable hand for show horses, satisfied the definition of "specified work" under sub-item 1225(5) of Schedule 1 and Legislative Instrument LIN 20/103. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether maintaining animals for the purposes of selling them, as described in the legislative instrument, encompassed the applicant's role in preparing horses for their owners' sales.

The Tribunal found that the primary decision maker had interpreted the legislative instrument too narrowly. The instrument defines specified work to include "maintaining animals for the purposes of selling them or their bodily produce." The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's work in maintaining animals for the purpose of assisting owners to sell them fell within this definition, and that the instrument did not require the business itself to have a direct selling dimension or to sell horses directly in an open market. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the applicant had met the criteria under clause 417.211(5) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Accordingly, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant met the specified work criteria for a Subclass 417 visa.