De Agrela (Migration)

Case

[2023] AATA 1535

31 March 2023


De Agrela (Migration) [2023] AATA 1535 (31 March 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Carlo-Renato De Agrela

CASE NUMBER:  1925990

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/5521717

MEMBER:De-Anne Kelly

DATE:31 March 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

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

· cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 31 March 2023 at 10:00am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – Direct Entry stream – Retail Manager – 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 1 February 2018. 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 Retail Manager.

  5. 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 employer nomination by THE TRUSTEE FOR DCB AUSTRALIA UNIT TRUST was refused being the application referred to in cl.187.233(1).

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

    CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

  7. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant satisfies cl187.233(3) which provides as follows.

    (3)       The Minister has approved the nomination.

    Nomination of a position

  8. 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.

  9. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the 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.

  10. The visa application was acknowledged by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection on 1 February 2018 and is consistent with the declaration in cl.1114B(3)(d) of Schedule 1 to the Regulations being made in the application for the grant of the visa.

  11. Mr Dino Carvalho represented the applicant, THE TRUSTEE FOR DCB AUSTRALIA UNIT TRUST which made the nomination and signed the Employment contract demonstrating they will employ the applicant. The application made was for the approval of the position of Retail Manager on $50,648 per annum.

  12. The Department refused to approve the nomination and the nominating employer applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision. The Tribunal set aside the Department’s decision and substituted a decision to approve the nomination made by Mr Dino Carvalho.

  13. There is no information before the Tribunal constituting adverse information regarding the owner of the business who represented the applicant. The most recent employment contract demonstrates that the position is still available to the applicant. The visa application was made on 1 February 2018 and therefore was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

  14. Therefore, cl.187.233(3) and cl.187.233 are met.

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

    DECISION

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

    ·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    De-Anne Kelly
    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

  • Remedies

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Jurisdiction

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0