Cheng (Migration)

Case

[2021] AATA 2522

18 June 2021


Cheng (Migration) [2021] AATA 2522 (18 June 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Fang-Chen Cheng

CASE NUMBER:  1828157

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2017/4640878

MEMBER:Glenn O'Brien

DATE:18 June 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

·cl 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 18 June 2021 at 8:08am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – Direct Entry stream – Grape Grower – subject of an approved nomination – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 187.233

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

  1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

  2. The applicant applied for the visa on 6 December 2017. At the time of application, Class RN contained one subclass: Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme).

  3. The criteria for a Subclass 187 visa are set out in Part 187 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria. Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria must meet the ‘Common criteria’, as well as the criteria of one of two alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, or the Direct Entry stream.

  4. In the present case, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Direct Entry stream, to work in the nominated position of Grape Grower (ANZSCO 121215).

  5. The applicant provided a copy of the delegate’s decision record with the application for review. The delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the nomination lodged by Starcastle Investments Pty Ltd in respect to the nominee was refused on 14 August 2018.

  6. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 4 June 2021 to give evidence and present arguments.

  7. The applicant was represented in relation to the review by his registered migration agent.

  8. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

    CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

  9. The issue in the present case is whether or not the applicant satisfies the employer nomination approval pursuant to cl 186.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. At the time of the delegate’s decision, the nomination lodged by Starcastle Investments Pty Ltd was refused by a delegate of the Minister on 14 August 2018.

    Nomination of a position

  10. Clause 187.233 as applicable in this case is set out in full in an attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that the position to which the application relates be the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration made as part of the current visa application. In addition, where the associated nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017, it must identify the applicant in relation to the position.

  11. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made nomination;

    ·the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn;

    ·there is no ‘adverse information’ known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person ‘associated with’ that person (within the meaning of reg 1.13A and reg 1.13B); or it is reasonable to disregard any such information;

    ·the position is still available to the applicant; and

    ·the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

  12. The nomination application by Starcastle Investments Pty Ltd which was refused by the delegate on 14 August 2018 came before the Tribunal for review. On 16 June 2021, the Tribunal set aside the refusal nomination and substituted its own decision approving the nomination. The nominee now satisfies cl 186.233(2).

  13. Therefore, cl 186.233(2) is met.

  14. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

  15. The Tribunal remits the application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

    ·cl 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Glenn O'Brien
    Member


    ATTACHMENT A

    187.233(1)     The position to which the application relates is the position:

    (a)nominated in an application for approval that seeks to meet the requirements of:

    (i)subparagraph 5.19(4)(h)(ii); or

    (ii)subregulation 5.19(4) as in force before 1 July 2012; and

    (aa)in relation to which the applicant is identified in the application under subparagraph 5.19(4)(a)(ii); and

    (b)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114C (3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.

    (2)     The person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the nomination.

    (3)     The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (4)     The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (4A)    Either:

    (a)there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person; or

    (b)it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person.

    (5)     The position is still available to the applicant.

    (6)     The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Appeal

  • Judicial Review

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0