CHEN (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, under the temporary residence transition stream. The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse the approval of a nomination made by Oz Finance Professional Pty Ltd. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically clause 186.223.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which outlines the requirements for a nominated position. This clause necessitates that the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that on 4 December 2020, it had affirmed the decision to refuse the approval of the nomination made by Oz Finance Professional Pty Ltd. As the nomination had been refused, the applicant could not satisfy subclause 186.223(2). Consequently, the applicant failed to meet the overall requirements of clause 186.223. The Tribunal had notified the applicants of its intention to affirm the decision, providing an opportunity to respond, but the applicants' newly appointed representative sought an extension of time to do so.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants the Subclass 186 visas, as the requirements for the temporary residence transition stream had not been met due to the refusal of the nomination.