Tan (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant sought review of a decision relating to her eligibility for the visa, specifically concerning the character test requirements.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), which mandates the provision of a statement from a relevant authority regarding criminal history from countries where the applicant has resided. The Tribunal also considered whether a Form 80 had been requested, as this is a mandatory requirement under regulation 2.03AA(2)(b) that cannot be waived.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided the requisite police clearances from Australia and Malaysia, satisfying regulation 2.03AA(2)(a). An Australian Federal Police clearance confirmed no disclosable outcomes, and a clearance from the Consulate General of Malaysia in Melbourne was accepted as a Certificate of Good Conduct (CGC), despite not being titled as such, given the supporting email evidence. The Tribunal considered the Malaysian CGC to remain current as the applicant had not returned to Malaysia since its issuance and had provided evidence of limited travel to other countries. As no evidence indicated a request for a Form 80, regulation 2.03AA(2)(b) was not applicable.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the applicant met the criteria under regulation 2.03AA(2) in relation to Public Interest Criterion 4001. The matter was remitted for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for the subclass 457 visa.