Fang (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 5593
•29 November 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fang (Migration) [2018] AATA 5593
[2018] AATA 5593
29 November 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Wan Lin Fang against a decision to refuse a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, subclass 187, Temporary Residence Transition stream. The appeal was heard by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Peter Emmerton. The core of the dispute revolved around the approval of the nomination for the position of Aquaculture Farmer.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination for the Aquaculture Farmer position met the criteria set out in clause 187.223 of the relevant regulations. Specifically, this involved assessing whether the nominated position was the same as that identified in the visa application, whether the nominator was the employer, whether the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, and whether the position remained available to the applicant.
The Tribunal found that the nominated position was indeed the same as that in the visa application and that the nominator was the employer. Crucially, the Tribunal had previously set aside the Department's refusal and substituted a decision approving the appointment for the position of Aquaculture Farmer. Based on this prior finding, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.223. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination for the Aquaculture Farmer position met the criteria set out in clause 187.223 of the relevant regulations. Specifically, this involved assessing whether the nominated position was the same as that identified in the visa application, whether the nominator was the employer, whether the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, and whether the position remained available to the applicant.
The Tribunal found that the nominated position was indeed the same as that in the visa application and that the nominator was the employer. Crucially, the Tribunal had previously set aside the Department's refusal and substituted a decision approving the appointment for the position of Aquaculture Farmer. Based on this prior finding, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.223. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Fang (Migration) [2018] AATA 5593
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0