Kaur (Migration)

[2022] AATA 3623

Kaur (Migration) [2022] AATA 3623 (15 October 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Ms Prabhjot Kaur
Mr Satish Kumar
Mr Amitoz Heer

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Pawan Kumar Bhambi (MARN: 0801321)

CASE NUMBER:  1919304

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2017/3260270

MEMBER:Susan Reece Jones

DATE:15 October 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 15 October 2022 at 2:45pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – direct entry stream – baker – subject of approved position nomination – related nomination application refused – attempts to recruit citizen or permanent resident in same area – nomination refusal set aside on review – decision made without hearing necessary – members of family unit – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 360(2)(a)
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 187.233(2)

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicants Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicants applied for the visas on 7 September 2017. At the time of application, Class RN contained one subclass: Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme).

3. The criteria for a Subclass 187 visa are set out in Part 187 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria. Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria must meet the 'Common criteria', as well as the criteria of one of two alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, or the Direct Entry stream.

4. In the present case, the first named applicant (the applicant) is seeking the visa in the Direct Entry stream, to work in the nominated position of Baker (ANZSCO 351111) for The Trustee For Shree Khodiyar Trust, which operates a bakery in Geelong, Victoria.

5. The delegate refused to grant the visas because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the nominator did not demonstrate that the applicant made adequate attempts to recruit suitably qualified and experienced Australian citizens or permanent residents to the nominated position who live in the same local area as that place.

6. In reaching a decision, the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicant on the basis of the material before it, pursuant to s.360(2)(a) of the Act.

7. The applicants were represented in relation to the review.

8. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

9. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets the requirements of cl.187.233.             

   Nomination of a position

10. Clause 187.233 as applicable in this case is set out in full in an attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that that the position to which the application relates be the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration made as part of the current visa application. In addition, where the associated nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017, it must identify the applicant in relation to the position.

11. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made nomination

    ·the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn

    ·there is no ‘adverse information’ known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person ‘associated with’ that person (within the meaning of reg 1.13A and reg 1.13B); or it is reasonable to disregard any such information

    ·the position is still available to the applicant, and

    ·the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

12. The applicant applied for a visa on the basis of a nomination made by The Trustee For Shree Khodiyar Trust. The employer nomination in which the applicant is identified as the relevant 457 visa holder and against which she made the relevant declaration at the time of the visa application, was refused by the Department on 23 May 2019. 

13. The nominator operates a company known as The Trustee for Shree Khodiyar Trust, which operates a Brumby’s franchised bakery in Geelong in regional Victoria.

14. The nominator applied to the Tribunal for review of the decision not to approve the relevant nomination.

15. On 15 October 2022, the Tribunal set aside the Department’s decision and substituted a decision approving the nomination.

16. As the relevant nomination in respect of the applicant has now been approved, the applicant meets the requirements in cl.187.233(2).

17. Therefore, given the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

18. As the Tribunal is remitting the applicant of the first name visa applicant with a finding that she meets the requirements of clause.187.233(2), the remaining criteria for the applicant should now be reconsidered. In addition, the application of the second named and third named visa applicants should also now be reconsidered in full.

    decision

19. The Tribunal remits the application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

    ·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

    Susan Reece Jones
    Member

    
    

    20.      ATTACHMENT A

    187.233(1)     The position to which the application relates is the position:

    (a)nominated in an application for approval that seeks to meet the requirements of:

    (i)subparagraph 5.19(4)(h)(ii); or

    (ii)subregulation 5.19(4) as in force before 1 July 2012; and

    (aa)in relation to which the applicant is identified in the application under subparagraph 5.19(4)(a)(ii); and

    (b)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114C (3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.

    (2)     The person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the nomination.

    (3)     The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (4)     The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (4A)    Either:

    (a)there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person; or

    (b)it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person.

    (5)     The position is still available to the applicant.

    (6)     The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.