Inotama (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to refuse an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme), under the temporary residence transition stream. The applicant, Inotama, sought to have this refusal set aside.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria set out in cl.186.223(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the grant of the Subclass 186 visa. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to consider whether the nominated position met the requirements, including that the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, that there was no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remained available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant and their representative failed to attend the scheduled hearing and were unable to be contacted by the Tribunal despite efforts. Consequently, the Tribunal proceeded to make a decision under s.426A of the Migration Act 1958 without further action to facilitate the applicant's appearance. The Tribunal affirmed the principle that while it may obtain relevant information, it is not under a general duty to conduct its own enquiries beyond what is provided by the applicant or under the Act. The Tribunal also reiterated that the onus is on the applicant to supply the necessary facts to establish their case.

As the applicant had not satisfied the requirements for the Subclass 186 visa in the temporary residence transition stream, the Tribunal affirmed the Department's decision to refuse the visa.