Teng (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal against a decision to affirm the refusal of a Child (Residence) (Class BT) visa, subclass 802. The applicant was the child, and the appeal was heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary issues: first, whether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4020, and if not, whether there were compassionate or compelling circumstances to justify a waiver; and second, whether the applicant satisfied PIC 4017. PIC 4020 broadly addresses the provision of bogus documents or false or misleading information in relation to a visa application, while PIC 4017 concerns consent to the grant of a visa for a child.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided a fraudulently altered copy of her father's passport and a Form 1229, purporting to be signed by her father, which appeared to be a bogus document. This was based on evidence that the applicant's mother had not contacted the father for seven to eight years, the father was unaware of the applicant's existence, and the altered passport copy did not match the information in its Machine-Readable Zone. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that false and misleading information had been provided to demonstrate compliance with PIC 4017. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.