Zhu (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled Nominated (Permanent) visa (Class SN), Subclass 190. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4020, which relates to the provision of false or misleading information or bogus documents in support of a visa application. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had provided such information or documents in relation to their application or a previous visa held within the preceding 12 months.

The Tribunal considered the definition of "information that is false or misleading in a material particular" and "bogus document" as set out in the Migration Regulations 1994 and the Migration Act 1958, respectively. It noted that the definition of a bogus document does not require the false or misleading statement to be relevant to a criterion for the grant of the visa, unlike the definition of false or misleading information. The Tribunal also acknowledged that PIC 4020 applies regardless of whether the Minister became aware of the issue through information provided by the applicant, and whether the document or information was provided knowingly or unwittingly.

Ultimately, the Tribunal remitted the applications for reconsideration. It directed that the first named applicant met PIC 4020 for the purposes of cl 190.216(1) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and that the second named applicant met the secondary criteria for the visa.