Ridwan Mase (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Ridwan Mase, an Indonesian citizen applying for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), under the temporary residence transition stream. The dispute centred on Mr Mase's eligibility for the visa, specifically concerning the requirement for English language proficiency. Mr Mase had declared he had functional English and had been employed in Australia since August 2005, but had not undertaken an English language test in the three years prior to his application and had not completed any secondary or tertiary studies where instruction was in English.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Mase met the English language proficiency requirement stipulated by the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically clause 187.222. This clause mandates that an applicant in the temporary residence transition stream must either demonstrate a defined level of English language proficiency or fall within a class of persons specified as exempt in the relevant legislative instrument. The Tribunal had to determine which legislative instrument applied to Mr Mase's application, made on 16 July 2019, and whether he met the criteria for competent English or qualified for an exemption under that instrument.

The Tribunal reasoned that for visa applications made on 16 July 2019, the applicable legislative instrument was IMMI 18/045, although it noted that the relevant provisions in this instrument and LIN 19/216 were substantially similar. Under IMMI 18/045, an exemption from the English language requirement is available to persons who, at the date of application, had completed at least five years of full-time study in a secondary or higher education institution where all tuition was delivered in English. While acknowledging Mr Mase's extensive employment history in Australia and his ability to communicate readily with colleagues, the Tribunal found that he did not meet this exemption criteria, nor had he provided evidence of achieving the required "competent English" level through a recent test. The Tribunal concluded that there was no discretion to disregard the English language requirement.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant Mr Mase the visa.