Konsa (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, specifically a Subclass 187 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme visa under the Direct Entry stream. The applicant, nominated by Jaad Holdings Pty Ltd for the position of Secretary, had their nomination initially refused by the Department. However, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had previously set aside this refusal and approved the nomination. The current proceedings before the Tribunal involved a review of the applicant's eligibility for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause outlines several conditions related to the nominated position, including that it must be located in regional Australia, be the subject of an approved nomination, and that the nominator must be the prospective employer. Further requirements stipulated that the nomination must identify the applicant (if made on or after 1 July 2017), the nomination must not have been withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons (or such information must be reasonable to disregard), the position must remain available to the applicant, and the visa application must have been made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the applicant satisfied all the conditions of clause 187.233. It noted that the nominated position was the same as that in the nomination application, the employer was the nominator, and the nomination had been approved by the Tribunal and not subsequently withdrawn. The Tribunal was also satisfied that the visa application was made within the six-month timeframe after the nomination approval and that no adverse information was known to Immigration concerning the nominator or associated persons. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the applicant met this specific criterion for the visa.

Given these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the appropriate course of action was to remit the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration. This remittal was specifically directed to allow the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, as the Tribunal had only made a determination regarding clause 187.233.