Jeong (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Stream), specifically the temporary residence transition stream. The applicant, Mr Jeong, sought review of a decision concerning the refusal of his related nomination. The Tribunal, presided over by George Hallwood, was tasked with determining whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was an approved nomination that satisfied clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be the subject of an approved nomination application that identifies the visa applicant, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available to the applicant, and that the visa application was lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the nominated position met the requirements of clause 186.223. It was satisfied that the position was nominated in the relevant application, that the applicant was identified as a Subclass 457 visa holder in relation to that position, and that the necessary declaration was made. The Tribunal also noted that it was not aware of any adverse information regarding the nominator or associated persons, and that evidence, including an employment agreement, confirmed the position remained available to the applicant. Furthermore, documentation indicated the visa application was made within the six-month timeframe after the nomination was approved.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 186.223 was met and remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria. The decision directed that the applicant met the specified criteria for the Subclass 186 visa.