CHOI (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), specifically the Direct Entry stream. The applicants sought review of a decision not to grant them this visa. The Tribunal, presided over by Sean Baker, ultimately affirmed the decision to refuse the visa.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants had satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, particularly clause 187.233, which requires the position to be the subject of an approved nomination. This clause outlines several conditions, including that the nomination must identify the applicant, be made in relation to the Direct Entry stream, and that the nominating employer must be the prospective employer. Furthermore, the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, with no adverse information known to Immigration, the position remaining available, and the visa application lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the nomination in question had not been approved. This conclusion was based on the fact that the Tribunal had previously determined it had no jurisdiction to review a decision to refuse the employer nomination lodged by Stockstandard & More Pty Ltd. As a result, the Department's decision refusing the nomination stood, meaning the nomination was not approved as required by clause 187.233(1). Since this primary criterion was not met, the Tribunal determined that the applicants had not satisfied the requirements for the visa in the Direct Entry stream.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas. The Tribunal noted that the first applicant had not satisfied the primary criteria, and no claims were made that the second and third applicants met these criteria, thus preventing them from satisfying the family unit criteria.