Kaur (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream. The applicant was nominated by LAXMIS TANDOORI INDIAN RESTAURANT PTY LTD ATF LAXMIS TANDOORI INDIAN RESTAURANT UNIT TRUST for the position of Cook. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the requirements for the visa, specifically concerning the necessity of an approved nomination.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants satisfied the criteria for the grant of the Subclass 187 visa, as set out in clause 187.233 of the Regulations. This included assessing whether the nominated position was the subject of an approved nomination, whether the employer who made the nomination was the prospective employer, and whether the visa application was made within the prescribed timeframe after the nomination approval. A key legal issue was the consequence of a nomination being refused by the Department.

The Tribunal reasoned that clause 187.233(3) requires the applicant to be the subject of an approved nomination. It noted that the nomination made by LAXMIS TANDOORI INDIAN RESTAURANT PTY LTD for the position of Cook had been refused by the Department, and this refusal was affirmed by the Tribunal in a related case. The applicant acknowledged that without an approved nomination, the visa applications could not be successful, as an approved nomination is an essential requirement. The Tribunal found no evidence of an approved nomination for the specified occupation in relation to the primary applicant, and therefore concluded that clause 187.233(3) was not satisfied.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants. The second and third applicants, as family members, could not satisfy the requirements of clause 187.311 as the primary applicant did not hold the Subclass 187 visa.