KIM (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 3753
•29 June 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
KIM (Migration) [2018] AATA 3753
[2018] AATA 3753
29 June 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Jungsook Kim (the applicant) against a decision relating to a Subclass 187 Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa. The applicant sought review of a decision concerning the approval of a nomination for the occupation of dental technician by Mildaze Pty Ltd.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl. 187.233(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the approval of the nominated position in the direct entry stream. This involved determining whether the nominator was the prospective employer, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was made within six months of the nomination approval.
The Tribunal found that Mildaze Pty Ltd was the applicant's nominator and prospective employer, as evidenced by the employment contract. It was also satisfied that the nomination had been approved on 22 May 2018 and had not been withdrawn. The Tribunal further determined that it was not aware of any adverse information concerning the nominator under regulations 1.13A and 1.13B, nor was there information suggesting the nominated position was no longer available. The Tribunal concluded that the nominator had adequately supported the application and appeared at a previous hearing where the position was discussed.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa applications for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the first applicant met the criteria under cl. 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and the secondary applicants met the criteria under cl. 187.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl. 187.233(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the approval of the nominated position in the direct entry stream. This involved determining whether the nominator was the prospective employer, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was made within six months of the nomination approval.
The Tribunal found that Mildaze Pty Ltd was the applicant's nominator and prospective employer, as evidenced by the employment contract. It was also satisfied that the nomination had been approved on 22 May 2018 and had not been withdrawn. The Tribunal further determined that it was not aware of any adverse information concerning the nominator under regulations 1.13A and 1.13B, nor was there information suggesting the nominated position was no longer available. The Tribunal concluded that the nominator had adequately supported the application and appeared at a previous hearing where the position was discussed.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa applications for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the first applicant met the criteria under cl. 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and the secondary applicants met the criteria under cl. 187.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
KIM (Migration) [2018] AATA 3753
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0