Employer Visit to China Overcomes Discrepancies in Evidence

Site visits in China by DIAC revealed discrepancies in referees details and concerns about whether the applicant was really a welder and working as such in the MRT case of Zhang071814608 [2008] MRTA 752 (21.8.08).

But the case was saved by the evidence of employer who had travelled to China and met the applicant. Here is what the MRT found:

•36.              Although the Department accepted that the first named visa applicant had a qualification as a welder, the Department had concerns about the first named visa applicant’s skill levels as a welder, as inconsistent information was given when the Department conducted checks. However, the Tribunal is satisfied that the first named visa applicant has an employment background and personal attributes that are relevant to, and consistent with the occupation of welding and that he has demonstrated that he has welding skills. The Tribunal has had the benefit of additional information. The Tribunal found the review applicant to be a credible witness and accepts that his company requires the services of a welder. The review applicant gave evidence that he himself is a qualified welder and he travelled to China in order to test the skills of the first named visa applicant. The review applicant was satisfied that the first named visa applicant had the required technical skills and the required level of knowledge of the industry. The Tribunal watched a video provided by the review applicant, which he claims is of the first named visa applicant and the Tribunal observed that the person in the video performed the work of a welder. The applicant also gave oral evidence regarding his work activities, which indicated that he performs most of the duties of a welder.

The additional video evidence would also have been useful.