CANTOS (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 2838

22 February 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
CANTOS (Migration) [2019] AATA 2838 [2019] AATA 2838 22 February 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, in the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant was the subject of an approved nomination as required by sub-regulation 187.223(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue was whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically concerning the nomination requirement. This involved assessing whether the nominated position was approved by the Minister, had not been withdrawn, and whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator. The Tribunal also considered whether the position was located in regional Australia, remained available to the applicant, and if the visa application was lodged within the prescribed timeframe after nomination approval.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. It found that an application by Mc Elligotts (Qld.) Pty Ltd to nominate the applicant for the position of scaffolder had been refused by the Department on 6 April 2018, and no review of this refusal was sought by the nominator. The Tribunal noted that no further information had been provided by or on behalf of the applicant, despite invitations to do so. As the essential requirement of an approved nomination had not been met, and no review of the nomination refusal was pursued, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had failed to satisfy the criteria for the visa.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Natural Justice

  • Jurisdiction

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0