SITU (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Business Skills (Residence) (Class DF) visa, subclass 892, by Mr. Situ and his family. The core dispute revolved around whether the primary applicant met the criteria set out in clause 892.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by Katie Malyon, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr. Situ satisfied at least two of the requirements stipulated in clause 892.212, in the absence of a determination of exceptional circumstances by the appropriate regional authority. These requirements related to the provision of employment to eligible employees, the net value of business and personal assets in Australia, and the net value of assets within the main business or businesses in Australia, all assessed over specific periods prior to the application date and requiring lawful acquisition.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. It considered the documentation provided by Mr. Situ's representative, which was submitted after the requested timeframe. The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the failure to meet the net assets requirement under clause 892.212(b), which mandates a net value of at least AUD 250,000 throughout the 12 months preceding the application. The provided financial statements and other documents were insufficient to establish that this criterion, or indeed any two of the criteria in clause 892.212, had been met.