Khan (Migration)
[2023] AATA 1749
•10 May 2023
Khan (Migration) [2023] AATA 1749 (10 May 2023)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT: Mr Muhammad Shawaz Khan
REPRESENTATIVE: Mr Aneel Khowaja (MARN: 1571699)
CASE NUMBER: 2001971
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S): BCC2019/5620108
MEMBER:Amanda Mendes Da Costa
DATE:10 May 2023
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the 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 10 May 2023 at 11.14am
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – Direct Entry stream – Security Consultant – subject of an approved nomination – request for deferral of decision declined – decision under review remitted
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 360
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 187.233STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 7 November 2019. At the time of application, Class RN contained one subclass: Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme).
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.
In the present case, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Direct Entry stream, to work in the nominated position of Security Consultant ANZSCO 442216.
The delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because he was not the subject of an approved nomination.
In reaching its 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.
The applicant was represented in relation to the review.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets the criteria in cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Nomination of a position
Clause 187.233 as applicable in this case is set out in full in an attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires 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.
In addition, this criterion also requires that:
·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the 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.
The Tribunal notes that MILLENIUM HI-TECH HOLDING PTY LTD (the nominator) made a nomination application for the position of Security Consultant ANZSCO 442216, in respect of the applicant. That application was refused by a delegate of the Minister and the nominator subsequently lodged an application with this Tribunal for review of that decision. On 9 May 2023 the Tribunal set aside the delegate’s decision and substituted its own decision approving the nomination.
The Tribunal is further satisfied that:
·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the 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.
Therefore, cl 187.233 is met.
Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.
DECISION
The Tribunal remits the application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:
·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Amanda Mendes Da Costa
MemberATTACHMENT A
187.233(1) The position to which the application relates is the position:
(a)nominated in an application for approval that:
(i)identifies the applicant in relation to the position; and
(ii)is made in relation to a visa in a Direct Entry stream; and
(iii)seeks to meet the requirements of subregulation 5.19(12); 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.
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
0
0
0