Khoja (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 6310

19 December 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Khoja (Migration) [2019] AATA 6310 [2019] AATA 6310 19 December 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, for a Retail Manager (General). The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination for the position had been approved, as this was a key criterion for the visa.

The Tribunal considered clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, which outlines the requirements for a nominated position. This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, located in regional Australia, and identified in relation to the applicant. It also requires that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to Immigration or that such information is reasonable to disregard, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the approved position was the same as that nominated and declared in the visa application, satisfying clause 187.233(1). It also found that the prospective employer was the nominator, meeting clause 187.233(2). Crucially, the Tribunal determined that, in light of its own approval of the appointment under regulation 5.19(4), the visa applicant now met the requirements of clause 187.233(3). Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria, with a direction that the applicant satisfied clause 187.233.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

  • Appeal

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0