Roy (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for review of a decision by the Minister to refuse a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa (subclass 482). The applicant had provided a reference for work in their home country, which the Department of Home Affairs subsequently investigated and found to be from an employer with whom the applicant had never worked. The applicant's explanation for this discrepancy was vague, suggesting the visa application process had been organised by a third party.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had provided a bogus document or false or misleading information in relation to their visa application, and if so, whether there were any circumstances that justified the grant of the visa despite this. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the applicant had demonstrated complicity in, or reckless indifference to, the provision of false or misleading information.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided a bogus document and false or misleading information. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant had discharged their onus to establish that they had not provided a bogus document or false or misleading information, nor that there were any circumstances that justified the grant of the visa. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated that they were not complicit in, or recklessly indifferent to, the provision of the false or misleading information. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.