KAUR (Migration)

This matter concerned applications for review of decisions to refuse Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas, specifically under the Subclass 186 Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant, Mrs. Rupinderjot Kaur, along with her secondary applicants, Mr. Manpreet Singh and Master Faeth Armaam Singh, sought review of these refusals before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nominated position of Hairdresser (ANZSCO 391111) met the requirements for the visa grant.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which outlines the criteria for an approved nomination in the Temporary Residence Transition stream. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to ascertain if the nominated position was the subject of an approved nomination that had not been withdrawn, if there was no adverse information concerning the nominator, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was made within the prescribed timeframe after the nomination approval.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visas. Its reasoning was based on the fact that the nominator, Reet Mann Pty Ltd, had its applications for approval of the nominated position refused by a delegate of the Minister. These refusals were subsequently affirmed by the AAT itself. Consequently, the nominator's applications for the nominated position had not been approved. As a result, the Tribunal found that the primary applicant did not meet the criteria stipulated in clause 186.223, which necessitates an approved nomination for the position. This failure to meet the primary applicant's criteria meant that the secondary applicants could not satisfy clause 186.311 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations.