[2020] NZIACDT 3 — MM v Registrar of Immigration Advisers

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 23 January 2020

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's published summary

Appeal against registrar’s decision to reject complaint about deception / whether sufficient evidence of deceit by adviser to justify returning complaint to Authority / adviser found employment for appellant / adviser allegedly sent appellant photos purporting to be restaurant where he would work but photos depicted different restaurant / restaurant sold and renamed / adviser sought variation of work visa which was approved / appellant complained he was deceived as to the identity of employer and scale of restaurant / registrar found advice given was adequate and rejected complaint / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442, s54 / no prima facie evidence of deceit / no evidence adviser knew photos were of a different restaurant / no evidence adviser knew of change of employer before employment agreement sent to appellant / adviser successful in performing contracted immigration services / appeal rejected.

Read the full decision (PDF, Ministry of Justice)

This page reproduces the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's own published summary as a fair report of public proceedings; the linked decision is the authoritative record. A decision is not itself a finding of wrongdoing — some complaints are dismissed. Complainants are anonymised by the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal. Complaints about advisers go to the Immigration Advisers Authority.