Amandeep Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Amandeep Singh and his wife, Ms Kaur, against a decision not to grant them Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas, specifically under the Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) Direct Entry stream. The primary applicant, Mr Singh, sought to satisfy the criteria for this visa subclass, while Ms Kaur's application was dependent on Mr Singh meeting the primary criteria as a member of his family unit.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Singh had been identified as the nominee in an approved nomination, as required by cl.186.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This criterion necessitates that the nomination in relation to which Mr Singh made his visa application must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn. The Tribunal was required to determine if the nomination made by the sponsoring company for the position of Café or Restaurant Manager met this requirement.

The Tribunal reasoned that the sponsoring company's nomination application had been withdrawn from the Department. Consequently, the nomination had not been approved, and Mr Singh therefore did not meet the criteria stipulated in cl.186.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. As Mr Singh failed to satisfy the primary criteria for the Subclass 186 visa in the Direct Entry stream, and no claims were made in respect of other visa streams, his application could not succeed. Furthermore, because Mr Singh did not meet the primary criteria, Ms Kaur, as a member of his family unit, also did not meet the criteria for the grant of the visa.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas to both applicants.