Kiranjit (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa, subclass 482, short-term stream, for the position of Program or Primary Products Inspector. The applicant, Kiranjit, sought review of a decision to refuse her visa application. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination identified in the visa application was approved and made by an approved work sponsor who had not ceased to be a sponsor.

The central legal issue was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 482.212(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates that the nomination identified in the visa application must be approved, made by an approved work sponsor at the time of approval, and not have ceased. The delegate had refused the application on the basis that the applicant's prospective employer did not have an approved nomination in place. The applicant was given an opportunity to respond but did not do so within the prescribed period.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that there was no evidence before it of an approved nomination in place for the applicant. The Tribunal explained to the applicant that an approved nomination is a mandatory requirement for the visa grant. The applicant indicated she was seeking a new employer to lodge a new nomination and requested additional time. However, the Tribunal declined to grant an extension, noting the applicant had been aware of the refusal reason for over three years and that it was uncertain when, or if, she would be able to provide the necessary information. The Tribunal concluded that as an essential requirement for the visa was not met, the decision under review must be affirmed.