Amrinder Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, in the Direct Entry stream, brought by Amrinder Singh. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically concerning the requirement for an approved nomination.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination. This involves considerations such as the employer being the nominator, the nomination being approved and not withdrawn, the absence of adverse information, the continued availability of the position, and the timing of the visa application relative to the nomination approval.

The Tribunal found that the applicant could not satisfy clause 187.233 because the position specified in the visa application was not the subject of an approved nomination. This was due to a prior decision on 17 April 2018, where the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's refusal of the nomination by RDS Worldwide Pty Ltd, finding it unlikely the company had the capacity to employ the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant provided evidence that RDS Worldwide Pty Ltd was no longer operating. The Tribunal relied on the principles articulated in *Singh v MIBP* [2017] FCAFC 105, which emphasised that the nomination requirement refers to a specific, factual employer nomination that was made and approved at a particular point in time, and that the visa application is assessed against that specific nomination and its approval.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 187 visa and affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.