Wong (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), brought by the applicant, Ms. Wong. The central dispute revolved around whether Ms. Wong had satisfied the requirement under clause 457.223(4)(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which mandates that an applicant demonstrate the necessary skills for their nominated occupation in the specified manner. The decision was made by Member Lilly Mojsin of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether Ms. Wong had adequately demonstrated that she possessed the skills necessary to perform the duties of a Chef, as required by clause 457.223(4)(e). This involved assessing whether the evidence provided by Ms. Wong, particularly in relation to a skills assessment, met the requirements stipulated by the Department and the regulations.

The Tribunal found that while Ms. Wong had applied for a skills assessment in February 2018, she failed to provide the outcome to the Department. Subsequently, a request for evidence of a skills assessment from Trades Recognition Australia (TRA) was made on 24 July 2018, to which she did not respond. Consequently, the delegate was not satisfied that the criterion was met. However, on 30 September 2020, Ms. Wong submitted a skills assessment from VETASSESS, on behalf of TRA, dated 25 September 2020, confirming she had successfully completed the assessment for the nominated occupation of Chef. Based on this evidence, the Tribunal concluded that Ms. Wong met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(e).

Given this finding, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate course of action was to remit the application for the Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa to the Minister for reconsideration. The remittal was accompanied by a direction that Ms. Wong had met the criteria under clause 457.223(4)(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, allowing the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.