Tian (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled Independent (Permanent) visa (subclass 189) by the applicant, Tian, and a second applicant who was a member of his family unit. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for the grant of the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied clause 189.222(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires that at the time of invitation to apply for the visa, the relevant assessing authority had assessed the applicant’s skills as suitable for their nominated skilled occupation. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant had provided evidence of a positive skills assessment from the Australian Institute of Medical Science (AIMS) for the nominated occupation of Medical Laboratory Scientist.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant claimed to have a positive skills assessment from AIMS dated 10 January 2018, prior to his invitation to apply for the visa, he had failed to provide any documentary evidence to support this claim, despite requests from both the Department and the Tribunal. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy clause 189.222(1) and therefore did not meet the criteria for a subclass 189 visa. The Tribunal also affirmed the decision to refuse the second applicant a visa, as she could not satisfy the secondary criteria of being a member of the family unit of a subclass 189 visa holder and had not met the primary criteria in her own right.