Xu (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Xu, concerning a Business Skills (Residence) (Class DF) visa, Subclass 890 (Business Owner). The primary applicant sought review of a decision not to grant her the visa, while secondary applicants sought review of decisions refusing them the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to consider the applications of the secondary applicants and, if so, whether the primary applicant met the criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal first addressed jurisdiction concerning the secondary applicants. It noted that the secondary applicants were not in the migration zone at the required times for their applications to be reviewable under the relevant sections of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant and her agent acknowledged this lack of jurisdiction at the hearing. The Tribunal then turned to the primary applicant's case, which involved assessing whether the net value of her business, ABC World Group Pty Ltd, met the required threshold of $100,000 for the 12 months preceding her application. A key issue was the delegate's disallowance of a claimed unsecured loan to ABC Business Migration Pty Ltd as a company asset, and the delegate's finding that the applicant's investment in the business was only $100,000, not the $200,000 claimed.

The Tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the applications of the secondary named applicants. Regarding the primary applicant, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the Subclass 890 visa. The reasons for affirming the delegate's decision were not detailed in the provided text, beyond the initial identification of issues concerning the valuation of business assets and the applicant's investment. The Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence before it to suggest the applicant met the requirements for any other visa subclasses within Class DF.