Zhang (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Zhang (the applicant) for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme). The dispute concerned allegations that the applicant had provided false or misleading information and a bogus document in a previous visa application, specifically relating to work experience and a certificate of employment.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4020, which mandates that an applicant must not have provided a bogus document or false or misleading information in relation to a visa application or a previously held visa. The Tribunal also had to consider whether it had jurisdiction to review the refusal decisions in relation to secondary applicants, who were not in the migration zone at the relevant times.

The Tribunal reasoned that while there were community allegations of false certificates and a departmental check that involved a brief phone call, there was no probative evidence to establish that the certificate of employment was bogus. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's current employer had conducted a site visit and work skills test before recruitment, and that the applicant had provided additional, consistent evidence from previous and current employers. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the secondary applicants were not in the migration zone when the refusal decisions were made or when the review application was lodged, meaning the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to review the decisions in relation to them.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration, directing that the primary applicant met PIC 4020 for the purposes of the Subclass 186 visa. However, in relation to all other applicants, the Tribunal found it did not have jurisdiction.