Kim (Migration)

Case

[2018] AATA 3756

2 July 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Kim (Migration) [2018] AATA 3756 [2018] AATA 3756 2 July 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, subclass 187, Temporary Residence Transition stream, for an Electrical Equipment Trades Worker and their family members. The primary dispute concerned whether the applicants met the criteria for the visa grant, specifically in relation to an approved nomination for the skilled position.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants satisfied clause 187.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which outlines the requirements for a Temporary Residence Transition nomination. This clause mandates, among other things, that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination application, that the applicant must have been identified in that nomination, and that the nomination must not have been subsequently withdrawn. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the position was located in regional Australia and if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator.

The Tribunal examined the evidence and found that while the applicants had made the required declaration and the nominator was identified as the TRUSTEE FOR SONG TRADING GROUP TRUST, a critical element was missing: an approved nomination. The Tribunal noted that it had previously affirmed a decision refusing the nomination under regulation 5.19 in a related AAT case. The Tribunal explained to the applicants that without an approved nomination, they could not satisfy clause 187.223(2), which is an essential requirement for the grant of the visa. The applicants acknowledged their understanding of this requirement.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants. The Tribunal also found that the spouse and children did not meet the criteria under clause 187.311 as they were not members of the family unit of a person who had been granted a subclass 187 visa based on satisfying the primary criteria.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0