Iscala (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a decision concerning an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought to have the decision not to grant her the visa affirmed. The dispute centred on whether the nomination of the position by Frangipani Gentle Care Group Homes Pty Ltd had been approved, a crucial requirement for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations, specifically subclause (3) which mandates that the Minister has approved the nomination. The Tribunal also had to determine if the applicant understood the distinction between an approved employer sponsorship for a temporary visa and the required approval of a nomination for the permanent visa in question.

The Tribunal reasoned that clause 187.233(3) requires the nomination to have been approved. Departmental records indicated that the nomination was refused on 22 August 2018, and there was no evidence of subsequent approval or that the nominating employer had sought review of this refusal. The applicant mistakenly believed her employer's sponsorship had been approved, which the Tribunal clarified was irrelevant to the nomination approval requirement. Despite being informed of the implications of the unapproved nomination under section 359AA of the Migration Act, the applicant indicated she had nothing further to say, reiterating her belief about the sponsorship approval.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the visa, as she failed to satisfy the essential criterion of an approved nomination under clause 187.233(3).