Armani Ent Pty Ltd ATF Nr Khoshaba Family Trust (Migration)
Case
•
[2021] AATA 2716
•9 June 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Armani Ent Pty Ltd ATF Nr Khoshaba Family Trust (Migration) [2021] AATA 2716
[2021] AATA 2716
9 June 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision to refuse the approval of a nominated position by Armani Ent Pty Ltd ATF Nr Khoshaba Family Trust. The applicant sought approval of a nomination for a visa, and the core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had correctly identified the proposed visa holder for the nominated occupation.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had met the criteria for the approval of the nomination, specifically focusing on regulation 2.72(5) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This regulation mandates that the nominator must identify the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, who will work in the nominated occupation. The Tribunal also considered the status of the identified nominee, Mr Jamiul Hasan, in relation to his visa applications and the nominated position.
The Tribunal found that the nominated person, Mr Jamiul Hasan, was no longer a proposed applicant for the visa in question who would work in the nominated occupation. This conclusion was based on the fact that Mr Hasan had previously had a visa application refused due to the refusal of a prior nomination, and subsequently, he had been granted a Subclass 482 visa in relation to a different nomination. As Mr Hasan was no longer a proposed applicant for the visa linked to the nomination under review, the Tribunal determined that regulation 2.72(5) had not been satisfied. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had met the criteria for the approval of the nomination, specifically focusing on regulation 2.72(5) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This regulation mandates that the nominator must identify the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, who will work in the nominated occupation. The Tribunal also considered the status of the identified nominee, Mr Jamiul Hasan, in relation to his visa applications and the nominated position.
The Tribunal found that the nominated person, Mr Jamiul Hasan, was no longer a proposed applicant for the visa in question who would work in the nominated occupation. This conclusion was based on the fact that Mr Hasan had previously had a visa application refused due to the refusal of a prior nomination, and subsequently, he had been granted a Subclass 482 visa in relation to a different nomination. As Mr Hasan was no longer a proposed applicant for the visa linked to the nomination under review, the Tribunal determined that regulation 2.72(5) had not been satisfied. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0