Kaldeep Kaur (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 4463
•30 September 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Kaldeep Kaur (Migration) [2019] AATA 4463
[2019] AATA 4463
30 September 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Kaldeep Kaur, who sought a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, for the occupation of Cook. The applicant's visa application was linked to a nomination made by Aggarwal Holdings (Aust) Pty Ltd. The primary dispute before the Tribunal was whether the position for which the visa was sought was the subject of an approved nomination that identified the visa applicant, as required by the relevant migration regulations.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant satisfied clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia, and must identify the visa applicant if the nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017. Additional requirements under this clause include that the nominator must be the prospective employer, the nomination must have been approved and not withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to Immigration (or such information must be reasonable to disregard), the position must remain available, and the visa application must be lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not provided evidence that the position was the subject of an approved nomination identifying her. It was noted that the nomination lodged by Aggarwal Holdings (Aust) Pty Ltd was refused by a delegate for the Minister for Home Affairs on 19 March 2018. Despite the applicant's submissions regarding her length of employment and her belief that the matter should be reviewed, the Tribunal found these points irrelevant to the specific criterion of an approved nomination. As the applicant failed to satisfy clause 187.233, the Tribunal also found that the secondary applicants did not satisfy clause 187.311.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant satisfied clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia, and must identify the visa applicant if the nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017. Additional requirements under this clause include that the nominator must be the prospective employer, the nomination must have been approved and not withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to Immigration (or such information must be reasonable to disregard), the position must remain available, and the visa application must be lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not provided evidence that the position was the subject of an approved nomination identifying her. It was noted that the nomination lodged by Aggarwal Holdings (Aust) Pty Ltd was refused by a delegate for the Minister for Home Affairs on 19 March 2018. Despite the applicant's submissions regarding her length of employment and her belief that the matter should be reviewed, the Tribunal found these points irrelevant to the specific criterion of an approved nomination. As the applicant failed to satisfy clause 187.233, the Tribunal also found that the secondary applicants did not satisfy clause 187.311.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Natural Justice
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0