Ranjalker (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 1442
•10 May 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ranjalker (Migration) [2018] AATA 1442
[2018] AATA 1442
10 May 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485, before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant the visa.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that an applicant, and any other person included in the application who is at least 16 years of age, must have applied for an Australian Federal Police check within the 12 months immediately preceding the date of the visa application.
The Tribunal found that the applicant conceded he had not applied for an Australian Federal Police check within the specified 12-month period prior to lodging his application. The applicant's stated lack of awareness of this requirement and his expectation of receiving a checklist post-lodgement were not considered by the Tribunal to overcome the explicit wording of the regulation. The Tribunal noted that clause 485.213 is mandatory and confers no discretion to waive the requirement. As the facts were not in dispute and the applicant clearly failed to meet this criterion, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that an applicant, and any other person included in the application who is at least 16 years of age, must have applied for an Australian Federal Police check within the 12 months immediately preceding the date of the visa application.
The Tribunal found that the applicant conceded he had not applied for an Australian Federal Police check within the specified 12-month period prior to lodging his application. The applicant's stated lack of awareness of this requirement and his expectation of receiving a checklist post-lodgement were not considered by the Tribunal to overcome the explicit wording of the regulation. The Tribunal noted that clause 485.213 is mandatory and confers no discretion to waive the requirement. As the facts were not in dispute and the applicant clearly failed to meet this criterion, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Ranjalker (Migration) [2018] AATA 1442
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0