Alavi (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, under the Direct Entry scheme. The applicant's sponsoring employer, Mr Hamidreza Soroush trading as Silhouette Painting and Maintenance, had applied for approval of a nomination for the position of Interior Designer. A delegate of the Minister refused this nomination application, finding it did not satisfy regulation 5.19(4)(a)(ii) of the Migration Regulations. The sponsoring employer sought review of this decision before the Tribunal, which affirmed the delegate's refusal. The Tribunal subsequently advised the applicant that without evidence of an approved nomination, she could not satisfy clause 187.233(3) of the Migration Regulations and that the visa would be refused unless she provided a response. The applicant failed to respond.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's sponsoring employer's nomination for the position of Interior Designer had been approved, a prerequisite for the applicant to satisfy the criteria for a Subclass 187 visa under the Direct Entry stream. Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether the nomination met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations, which mandates that the nominated position must have been the subject of an approved nomination application under the relevant regulations, that the nominator is the prospective employer, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that the sponsoring employer's nomination had been refused by the Department and this decision was affirmed by the Tribunal. The applicant was given an opportunity to provide information to demonstrate that the nomination had been approved, but she failed to do so. As the applicant had not provided evidence of an approved nomination, she could not satisfy clause 187.233(3) of the Migration Regulations. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the requirements for the Direct Entry stream of the Subclass 187 visa had not been met.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa.