Avanpreet Singh (Migration)

Case

[2018] AATA 3867

20 September 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Avanpreet Singh (Migration) [2018] AATA 3867 [2018] AATA 3867 20 September 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned a review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, under the direct entry scheme. The applicant, Avanpreet Singh, sought to have the Tribunal's decision affirmed, which had affirmed the refusal of his visa application.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the approval of the nomination lodged by the prospective employer, Dreamchasers Pty Ltd ATF Serendipity Unit Trust. This clause requires, among other things, that the Minister has approved the nomination and that the nomination has not been subsequently withdrawn.

The Tribunal reasoned that the nomination application made by Dreamchasers Pty Ltd ATF Serendipity Unit Trust was refused on 10 June 2016. Subsequently, the Tribunal affirmed this refusal on 28 August 2018. As the nomination had not been approved by the Minister, and indeed had been refused and that refusal affirmed, the applicant could not satisfy the criterion under clause 187.233(3) that the Minister has approved the relevant nomination. The Tribunal provided the applicant with an opportunity to comment on this issue, but the applicant's representative informed the Tribunal that he was no longer acting for the applicant.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, as the essential requirement of an approved nomination had not been met.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0