Harbhajan Singh (Migration)

[2022] AATA 3466

Harbhajan Singh (Migration) [2022] AATA 3466 (4 October 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Harbhajan Singh

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Harjeet Singh (MARN: 1679096)

CASE NUMBER:  1921779

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/1194383

MEMBER:Peter Emmerton

DATE:4 October 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Adelaide

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the 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 04 October 2022 at 12:30pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – direct entry stream – transport company manager – subject of approved position nomination – refusal of related nomination application set aside on review – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 5.19(4)(h)(ii), 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 13 March 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 Transport Company Manager, ANZSCO149413, Skill level 2.

5. The delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the nomination was not approved.

6. The applicant was represented in relation to the review.

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

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

8. The issue in the present case is whether the nomination has been approved.

9. In determining the applicants’ claims the Tribunal must first make findings of fact on material matters in dispute.  This may involve an assessment of credibility and in so doing, the Tribunal is aware of the need and the importance of being sensitive to the circumstances and the difficulties applicants often face before the Tribunal in their individual circumstances.

10. The applicants rely on the evidence given before the Tribunal together with written submissions and supporting evidence provided to the Tribunal and previously to the department.

    Nomination of a position

11. For applicants in the Direct Entry stream, cl.187.233 requires that the position to which the application relates be the subject of an application for approval of a nominated position under r.5.19(4)(h)(ii) of the Regulations (that is, a Direct Entry nomination in regional Australia), or under r.5.19(4) as it was prior to 1 July 2012 (that is, a Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme nomination). The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration that was required to be made as part of the current visa application. In addition, where the associated nomination is made on or after 1 July 2017, the position must be the position in relation to which the applicant is identified in that nomination under r.5.19(4)(a)(ii).

12. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made 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 r.1.13A and r.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.

13. On 8 March 2018 the sponsoring employer lodged a nomination for a residence visa under the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN 187) visa in favour of the visa applicant. On 4 June 2019 the employer’s nomination application was refused.

14. On 4 October 2022, the Tribunal set the Department’s decision aside and substituted a decision approving the appointment for the position of Transport Company Manager.[1] Based on evidence provided in that application, the Tribunal is satisfied the approved position is the same as the one that was the subject of the relevant r.5.19 nomination application. The Tribunal is also satisfied the position is the same as that in the visa application declaration. Therefore cl.187.233(1) is met.

    [1] See MRT decision file ref.1916422

15. The Tribunal relies on its findings in the nomination application to find the person who will employ the applicant is the person who was the nominator in the application for approval. Therefore cl. 187.233(2) is met. In light of the Tribunal’s approval of the appointment under r.5.19, the Tribunal finds that the visa applicant now meets the requirements of cl.187.233(3).

16. The Tribunal is also satisfied on all the evidence before it that the relevant appointment has not been withdrawn and is still available to the visa applicant. Therefore cl.187.233(4) and (5) are met.

17. The Tribunal has no evidence before it and is subsequently satisfied that there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination, or a person associated with that person, therefore cl.187.233(4A) is met. 

18. The application for the visa was made on 13 March 2018, which is before the nomination was approved on 4 October 2022. As the visa application was made on a date which is no more than 6 months after the approval, cl.187.233 (6) is met.

19. The Tribunal therefore finds the visa applicant satisfies the requirements specified in cl.187.233. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

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

    ·cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Peter Emmerton
    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.