Khetarpal (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a decision to refuse a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, to the first named applicant. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning an approved nomination for the position.

The Tribunal was required to determine if there was an approved nomination that met the criteria outlined in clause 187.233(3). This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia, and identified in relation to the applicant if the nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017. Further requirements include that the nominator must be the prospective employer, the nomination must be approved and not withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to Immigration, the position must remain available, and the visa application must be made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the visa. It found that the applicant's nominator's application for approval of a nomination had been refused by the Department, and this refusal was affirmed by the Tribunal. The applicant acknowledged not having an approved nomination. The Tribunal relied on the principles established in *Singh v MIBP* [2017] FCAFC 105, which emphasised that the visa application must be considered against a specific, approved employer nomination, highlighting the "once off" nature of this process.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa to the primary applicant, as the essential criterion of an approved nomination was not met. The Tribunal also affirmed the refusal of the visa for the secondary applicant, as she was not a member of the family unit of a Subclass 187 visa holder and did not meet the primary criteria herself.