Tribunal : Member T Flood A mother and daughter applied for review of decisions made by the Department of Home Affairs to refuse their applications for protection visas. Australia has an obligation under the Migration Act 1958 to protect individuals who can satisfy one o...
Tribunal: Member R Smidt Australia has an obligation under the Migration Act 1958 to protect individuals who can satisfy one of two criteria. [1] The ‘refugee criterion’ broadly requires the applicant to have a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ [2] should they be ...
Tribunal: Member J Thomson The applicant (the father) in this matter objected to a decision of the Child Support Agency (Agency) to not allow him an extension of time. He applied to the AAT to review this decision. The key question for the AAT was whether or not an extens...
Tribunal: Senior Member R Westaway (Presiding) and Member N Hossen The AAT reviewed the decision of the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) to refuse to grant the applicant a Student visa. The Department was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine student wh...
Tribunal: Member C Smolicz The AAT was asked to review a decision made by the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant feared imprisonment on return to Egypt due to his actions of seeking asylum in Australia and his po...
Member: Roslyn Smidt The applicant is an unmarried woman from India who first arrived in Australia on a student visa in June 2006. In her protection visa application, the applicant said that she left India to further her studies and to be relieved from the social and cultura...
Tribunal Member: Josephine Kelly The applicant suffers from hearing loss and made a request to the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) for funding for high level technology hearing aids. The AAT was asked to review the NDIA’s decision to refuse the application. The A...
Tribunal: Member Paul Millar The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (the Department) refused to grant the applicant a Protection visa. The applicant requested a review of the decision by the AAT. The applicant claimed to fear harm from the political party in ...
Tribunal: Senior Member Donald Davies The applicant requested the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) grant him a Queensland Building – Open Licence. At the time of the application, the applicant already held NSW and New Zealand building licenses. He req...
Tribunal: Member Susan Trotter The applicant was a business that owned and operated a number of restaurants in Queensland. The business applied to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (the Department) for approval of the nomination of a Café or Restaurant Ma...
Tribunal: Member Alison Murphy The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (the Department) cancelled the applicants’ protection visas on 10 April 2017. The applicants, a husband and wife who arrived in Australia from Iran in May 2010, identified themselves as sta...
Tribunal: Member J Cripps-Watts The AAT remitted the decision not to grant a Distinguished Talent (Residence) visa, instead asking the Department to reconsider in light of evidence that the applicant was eminent in the field of international trade negotiation. The Disting...
Tribunal: Member I Fletcher The Department of Human Services (the Department) refused the applicant’s disability support pension[1] (DSP) application. The applicant sought a review of this decision on the basis that she had permanent impairments that affected her continuin...
Tribunal: Member D Kelly The AAT affirmed the Department of Home Affairs’ decision to refuse the applicant’s employer nomination application of a medical practitioner position.[1] The AAT considered whether the applicant met the requirements for approval of the nomination...
Tribunal: Member W Banfield The Department of Home Affairs (the Department) cancelled the applicant’s student visa. The applicant applied to the AAT for a review of the decision. The AAT affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The appl...
Tribunal: Member R Gagliardi The AAT affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration refusing to grant the applicant a visitor visa. The Tribunal found the applicant was highly mobile and once here there were no strong incentives for her to return to Vi...
Tribunal : Member H Claringbold The AAT remitted the decision to refuse the applicant’s partner visa application for reconsideration. A delegate for the Minister of Immigration and Border Protection (the Department) had refused to grant the applicant a partner visa as the...
Tribunal: Member N Goetz The AAT remitted a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration (the Department) to refuse to a subclass 600 family sponsored stream visitor visa. The Department had refused the visa because they were not satisfied the applicant would sta...
Tribunal : Member J Silva The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) set aside a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration (the Department) and substitutes a decision not to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 866 (Protection) visa. The applicant had arrived in Aus...
Tribunal : Deputy President P Britten-Jones and Member R Ormston The applicant served in the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) from 1968 to 1973. This included two periods of operational service in Vietnam as a diver on HMAS Swan and HMAS Derwent. In March 1970, his ‘diving buddy...
Pages: 19 of 25