The applicants sought a review of a decision from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to ban them from providing financial services. The AAT found that the applicants each contravened a financial services law and that the power to ban them was established.
The AAT considered if extensive traffic related offences were a basis for finding a person was not of good character.
In this decision, the AAT had to decide if the applicant was a member of the Defence force for the period he was applying for disability pension.
Migration and Refugee Division
The Tribunal affirmed a decision to not grant a protection visa based on medical reports, but made a recommendation for ministerial intervention on compassionate grounds.
The Tribunal reviewed whether the applicant’s visa should be cancelled because of incorrect and incomplete information provided in their protection visa application.
In this decision, the AAT assessed whether there was a need for a nominated position and whether the employer nomination application should be approved by the Department.
The AAT affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s visa because they had made false statements in an earlier visa application.
The Tribunal examined the nature of the applicant’s relationship to determine if a partner visa application should have been granted by the Department.
The AAT considered if the applicant in this case met the requirements for a distinguished talent visa.
Social Services and Child Support Division
An applicant who had previously received a disability support pension, but was disqualified because of her financial position, reapplied after her finances and health deteriorated.
In this decision, the applicant request a review of their disability support pension rejection based on their permanent impairment.
In making this decision, the AAT had to consider the percentage of care for only the youngest of the former couple’s three children.