Brar (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa (Subclass 187) under the direct entry stream. The applicant's nominated position was for a hairdresser. The core dispute revolved around the validity of the nomination required for the visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for a valid nomination under clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to ascertain if the nominated position was the subject of an approved nomination that had not been withdrawn, and if the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate this.

The Tribunal reasoned that a key requirement for the visa was that the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn. The applicant had informed the Tribunal that the nomination had been withdrawn and could not provide a copy of a current, approved nomination. Despite being invited to provide comments and evidence on the issues under review, the applicant's response focused on other matters such as their child's health and employment details, but did not substantively address the existence of a valid nomination. The Tribunal noted that it had no discretion in this matter and that the applicant had not provided any information to suggest they were the subject of an approved nomination as required by the regulations.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the requirements of clause 187.233 were not met. As the applicant had only sought to satisfy the criteria for the direct entry stream and had failed to meet those essential requirements, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.