Hove (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Subclass 186 Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant, Mufaro Hove, along with his family members, sought this visa. The core dispute arose when the employer, BHP Group Limited, withdrew its sponsorship of the applicant, leading to the withdrawal of the nomination for the position. The Tribunal was asked to review the decision to refuse the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines several conditions for the nominated position, including that the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, and that the position must still be available to the applicant. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's request for Ministerial intervention under section 351 of the Migration Act 1958 on compassionate grounds and for exceptional benefit to Australia.

The Tribunal reasoned that because BHP Group Limited had withdrawn its sponsorship and nomination on 11 May 2020, the applicant could not satisfy the requirements of clause 186.223(3) and (4), which stipulate that the nomination must not have been withdrawn and the position must remain available. Consequently, the applicant and his family members were unable to meet the criteria for the Subclass 186 visa in the Temporary Residence Transition stream. Despite affirming the decision to refuse the visa, the Tribunal found that the applicants' circumstances warranted further consideration for Ministerial intervention, citing cogent grounds for such intervention.