Sais Marroquin (Migration)

This matter concerned applications for Skilled Independent (Permanent) visas (Subclass 189) made by the first and second named applicants. The dispute before the Tribunal, constituted by Member Sheridan Aster, related to whether the first applicant met the requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), specifically concerning the provision of a criminal history statement from their home country. The outcome for the second applicant, who was a member of the first applicant's family unit, was contingent on the determination of the first applicant's application.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the first applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This regulation pertains to the provision of a statement from an appropriate authority in the applicant's home country regarding their criminal record, and potentially the completion of an approved Form 80. The Tribunal was required to assess the evidence provided by the applicant against these regulatory requirements.

The Tribunal found that the first applicant had provided a certificate issued by the Secretariat of Security and Social Rehabilitation of Mexico on 24 January 2024, which satisfied the requirement for a statement from an appropriate authority under reg 2.03AA(2)(a). Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that there was no evidence that the delegate had requested the applicant to provide a completed approved Form 80, meaning the requirement under reg 2.03AA(2)(b) did not apply in this instance. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the first applicant met regulation 2.03AA(2). The Tribunal remitted the applications for Skilled Independent (Permanent) visas for reconsideration by the Department, with the specific direction that the first named applicant meets regulation 2.03AA(2). The application of the second named applicant will be determined based on the outcome of the first applicant's reconsidered application.