VASCONCELLOS DA SILVA (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 4742
•6 December 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
VASCONCELLOS DA SILVA (Migration) [2018] AATA 4742
[2018] AATA 4742
6 December 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Vasconcellos Da Silva concerning an application for a Distinguished Talent (Residence) (Class BX) visa, Subclass 858. The applicant, a tattoo artist specialising in work for women with breast cancer and scar cover-ups, sought review of a decision regarding her eligibility for this visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for an internationally recognised record of exceptional and outstanding achievement in the arts.
The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the requirements of sub-clause 858.212(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This sub-clause mandates that an applicant must have an internationally recognised record of exceptional and outstanding achievement in a specified area, be still prominent in that area, be an asset to the Australian community, and have no difficulty in becoming established in Australia. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not claim to meet the alternative criteria under sub-clause 858.212(4), which relates to providing specialised assistance to the Australian Government in matters of security.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's extensive experience as a tattoo artist, spanning 22 years, and her establishment of a business in Australia since 2013. It had regard to the substantial evidence provided by the applicant, including her oral evidence and that of a witness, Ms Macedo, finding both to be credible and cogent. The Tribunal also conducted independent inquiries and considered the applicant's national and international profile, her participation in professional and charitable events, and the growth of her specialised tattooing business. Based on its findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the criteria under cl.858.212.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Distinguished Talent (Residence) (Class BX) visa to the Department for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in cl.858.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the requirements of sub-clause 858.212(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This sub-clause mandates that an applicant must have an internationally recognised record of exceptional and outstanding achievement in a specified area, be still prominent in that area, be an asset to the Australian community, and have no difficulty in becoming established in Australia. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not claim to meet the alternative criteria under sub-clause 858.212(4), which relates to providing specialised assistance to the Australian Government in matters of security.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's extensive experience as a tattoo artist, spanning 22 years, and her establishment of a business in Australia since 2013. It had regard to the substantial evidence provided by the applicant, including her oral evidence and that of a witness, Ms Macedo, finding both to be credible and cogent. The Tribunal also conducted independent inquiries and considered the applicant's national and international profile, her participation in professional and charitable events, and the growth of her specialised tattooing business. Based on its findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the criteria under cl.858.212.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Distinguished Talent (Residence) (Class BX) visa to the Department for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in cl.858.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0