Kumari (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for review by Raj Kumari concerning a decision to refuse a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry Nomination stream. The secondary applicants, Gurinder Kumar and Jasleen Jhally, were included as family members.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 187.233(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires that the nomination relied upon for the visa application has been approved by the Minister. The Tribunal also considered whether clause 187.311, relating to secondary applicants being members of the family unit of a primary applicant who holds the visa, had been satisfied.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had not provided any information demonstrating that their nomination had been approved, despite being requested to do so under section 359(2) of the Migration Act 1958. Furthermore, the Tribunal had received information that the nomination review application by the relevant company had been withdrawn. Citing the decision in *Singh v MIBP* [2017] FCAFC 105, the Tribunal affirmed that the nomination must be approved at the time of the visa application. As there was no evidence of an approved nomination, the requirements of clause 187.233(3) were not met. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.