Gautam (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, by the applicant, and a related application by secondary applicants. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicants had satisfied the criteria for the grant of the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided evidence of an approved nomination that had not been withdrawn, and whether the nominated position remained available. Specifically, the Tribunal considered clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, which outlines the requirements for a nomination in the Direct Entry stream. This included the need for the nominator to be the prospective employer, the nomination to have been approved and not withdrawn, the absence of adverse information concerning the nominator, the continued availability of the position, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided evidence of a current nomination and stated that the company had ceased operations, making contact with the former nominator impossible. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the requirements of clause 187.233 were not met, as there was no information before it suggesting an approved nomination. As the primary applicant did not satisfy the criteria, the secondary applicants, as members of the family unit, also failed to meet the requirements of clause 187.311.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants.