Gesuato (Migration)
Case
•
[2020] AATA 3515
•6 July 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Gesuato (Migration) [2020] AATA 3515
[2020] AATA 3515
6 July 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Mr Oscar Gesuato for a Subclass 187 Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa under the Direct Entry stream. The central dispute concerned whether Mr Gesuato satisfied the criteria for the visa, specifically those relating to his qualifications and relevant experience for the nominated occupation of Agricultural Technician.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Gesuato met the requirements of clause 187.234 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines three alternative pathways for applicants in the Direct Entry stream: being an exempt person, having a skills assessment by a specified authority for an occupation listed by the Minister (with certain conditions regarding the assessment's validity and type), or possessing the qualifications listed in ANZSCO as necessary for the occupation if neither of the first two pathways applies. The application was lodged on 1 December 2016, meaning the criteria in force at that time were relevant.
The Tribunal found that Mr Gesuato did not satisfy the criteria under paragraph (a) or (c) of clause 187.234. However, it concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that Mr Gesuato met the criteria under paragraph (b) of clause 187.234. This indicates that the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Gesuato's skills had been assessed as suitable for the occupation by the relevant authority, and that the assessment met the specified requirements regarding its date and validity, and was not for a Subclass 485 visa. The Tribunal therefore remitted the application for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for the visa.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Gesuato met the requirements of clause 187.234 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines three alternative pathways for applicants in the Direct Entry stream: being an exempt person, having a skills assessment by a specified authority for an occupation listed by the Minister (with certain conditions regarding the assessment's validity and type), or possessing the qualifications listed in ANZSCO as necessary for the occupation if neither of the first two pathways applies. The application was lodged on 1 December 2016, meaning the criteria in force at that time were relevant.
The Tribunal found that Mr Gesuato did not satisfy the criteria under paragraph (a) or (c) of clause 187.234. However, it concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that Mr Gesuato met the criteria under paragraph (b) of clause 187.234. This indicates that the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Gesuato's skills had been assessed as suitable for the occupation by the relevant authority, and that the assessment met the specified requirements regarding its date and validity, and was not for a Subclass 485 visa. The Tribunal therefore remitted the application for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for the visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Gesuato (Migration) [2020] AATA 3515
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0