Lehmann (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, by an applicant and their associated family member. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant's associated nomination for the position was approved, a prerequisite for the visa grant. The decision was made by Bridget Cullen, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 186 visa, specifically clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination that identifies the visa applicant. The Tribunal also had to consider the implications of the nomination application being refused by the Department and subsequently affirmed on review by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal reasoned that clause 186.223(2) requires the nomination to have been approved. In this case, the nomination lodged by Versatronics Pty Ltd was refused by the Department and this refusal was affirmed by the Tribunal. Despite being invited to comment on this information, the applicant did not respond. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant could not satisfy clause 186.223(2) as the nomination was not approved. As the primary applicant failed to meet the essential criteria for the visa, the secondary applicant, as a member of the family unit, also could not meet the requirements.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas to the applicants.