Hsiao (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, specifically a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa under the Direct Entry stream, for a Massage Therapist. The applicant sought review of a decision concerning their visa application, and the case was heard by Member Angela Julian-Armitage of the Tribunal. The central dispute revolved around whether an approved nomination for the position the applicant was to fill was in place.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 were met. This clause mandates that the position be the subject of an approved nomination application in regional Australia, that the applicant be identified in relation to the position (for nominations made on or after 1 July 2017), that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination be approved and not withdrawn, that there be no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons, or that such information be reasonably disregarded, that the position remain available to the applicant, and that the visa application be made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the nomination for the applicant's position had been approved on 20 April 2023, that the position remained available and was currently occupied by the applicant who held a bridging visa allowing work, and that no adverse information was before the Tribunal concerning the applicant or an associate. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 187.233 was satisfied.

Given these findings, the Tribunal remitted the visa application for reconsideration by the Minister, directing that the applicants meet the criteria specified in clauses 187.233, 187.223, 187.242, and 187.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.