Yu v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services & Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 209
The Migration Regulations require the applicant for a Business Owner visa to satisfy the 'ownership interest' criterion not only at the time of application but also at the time of the relevant decision, which includes the time of the Tribunal's decision on review. Because the applicant no longer held an ownership interest at the time of the Tribunal's decision, she could not satisfy the criterion, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
- Parties
- First Appellant: Dai Yu; Second Appellant: Xinyue Yu; Third Appellant: Qiang Bi; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services & Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 February 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Federal Court Appeal From Federal Circuit Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Business Owner Visa, Ownership Interest, Merits Review, Criteria at Time of Decision
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dai Yu
First Appellant
Xinyue Yu
Second Appellant
Qiang Bi
Third Appellant
Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services & Multicultural Affairs
First Respondent
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Federal Court Appeal From Federal Circuit Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the primary applicant for a Business Owner visa must satisfy the 'ownership interest' criterion at the time of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal's review decision, or whether it is sufficient to have satisfied it at the time of the delegate's decision
Ratio Decidendi
The Migration Regulations require the applicant for a Business Owner visa to satisfy the 'ownership interest' criterion not only at the time of application but also at the time of the relevant decision, which includes the time of the Tribunal's decision on review. Because the applicant no longer held an ownership interest at the time of the Tribunal's decision, she could not satisfy the criterion, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal be dismissed.
- The appellants pay the first respondent's costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment