Kaur (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by Ms Kaur against the refusal of her Subclass 186 Employer Nomination Scheme visa application, specifically under the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The nomination was for a position as a hairdresser, a role Ms Kaur had previously occupied. The primary dispute concerned whether the employer had genuinely offered the position to Ms Kaur for the required period.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the employer had made a genuine offer of employment to Ms Kaur for at least two years, as required by the relevant migration regulations for the Temporary Residence Transition stream of the Subclass 186 visa. This involved assessing the employer's intentions and the availability of the nominated position.

The Tribunal found that the employer had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the nominated position of hairdresser was available for at least two years. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that the employer had previously employed Ms Kaur in this role and that the business operations supported the continued need for such a position. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and remitted the matter to the Department of Home Affairs for reconsideration.