AQIL (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr. Aqil against a decision to refuse him an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) Direct Entry stream. The appeal was heard by Katie Malyon, a Member of the Tribunal. The central dispute revolved around whether Mr. Aqil was the subject of an approved nomination as required by the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination application made by the Trustee for the position of Registered Nurse (Community Health) had been approved, and consequently, whether Mr. Aqil met the criteria for the Subclass 186 visa in the Direct Entry stream. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider clause 186.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which outlines the requirements for an approved nomination, including that the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, and that the visa application must be made within six months of the nomination approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Trustee's nomination application had been refused by the Department, and no review of that decision was sought. As a result, the position to which Mr. Aqil's visa application related could not meet the criteria in clause 186.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, particularly subclause (3) which requires the Minister to have approved the nomination. Mr. Aqil acknowledged this position. Since Mr. Aqil had only sought to satisfy the criteria for the Direct Entry stream and had not met the essential requirement of an approved nomination, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr. Aqil the Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa.