Gadkari (Migration)
Case
•
[2023] AATA 1120
•26 April 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Gadkari (Migration) [2023] AATA 1120
[2023] AATA 1120
26 April 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought to satisfy the criteria for this specific visa stream.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines several conditions for the nominated position, including that it must be located in regional Australia, identified in an approved nomination, and that the employer who made the nomination is the one who will employ the applicant. Crucially, it also requires that the nomination has been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal considered information indicating that the nominating employer's application for review had been dismissed on 10 October 2022. Consequently, the Tribunal was invited to consider whether the nomination had, in fact, been approved by the Minister, as required by cl.187.233(3). The applicant was provided with an opportunity to respond to this information, but the Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the requirements of cl.187.233.
As the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the necessary criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, the decision under review was affirmed.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines several conditions for the nominated position, including that it must be located in regional Australia, identified in an approved nomination, and that the employer who made the nomination is the one who will employ the applicant. Crucially, it also requires that the nomination has been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal considered information indicating that the nominating employer's application for review had been dismissed on 10 October 2022. Consequently, the Tribunal was invited to consider whether the nomination had, in fact, been approved by the Minister, as required by cl.187.233(3). The applicant was provided with an opportunity to respond to this information, but the Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the requirements of cl.187.233.
As the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the necessary criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, the decision under review was affirmed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Natural Justice
-
Standing
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Gadkari (Migration) [2023] AATA 1120
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
0
Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2002] FCA 617
Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
[2012] FMCA 28
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li
[2013] HCA 18