ILTUTHMISH (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 3374
•12 July 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
ILTUTHMISH (Migration) [2019] AATA 3374
[2019] AATA 3374
12 July 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream. The dispute arose after the applicant's nomination application was refused, and the applicant subsequently requested a delay in the Tribunal's decision to await the approval of another nomination with a different sponsor.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations, specifically concerning the nomination of a position. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be located in regional Australia, that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination has been approved and not withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant had not met the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream. The Tribunal considered the applicant's request for a 4-5 month delay to await a new nomination but deemed this unreasonable given the time already elapsed. The Tribunal also noted that the previous nomination application had been refused and was not subject to review. Furthermore, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the second applicant, who was a family member, a visa, as they did not meet the secondary criteria for a Subclass 187 visa and had not demonstrated they met the primary criteria in their own right.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations, specifically concerning the nomination of a position. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be located in regional Australia, that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination has been approved and not withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant had not met the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream. The Tribunal considered the applicant's request for a 4-5 month delay to await a new nomination but deemed this unreasonable given the time already elapsed. The Tribunal also noted that the previous nomination application had been refused and was not subject to review. Furthermore, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the second applicant, who was a family member, a visa, as they did not meet the secondary criteria for a Subclass 187 visa and had not demonstrated they met the primary criteria in their own right.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
ILTUTHMISH (Migration) [2019] AATA 3374
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0