Li (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 1168
•4 April 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Li (Migration) [2019] AATA 1168
[2019] AATA 1168
4 April 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, for the position of Accountant (General). The applicant's employer, Country Harvest (NE) Pty Ltd, had initially not had an approved nomination at the time of the delegate's decision. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 187.233, which requires, among other things, that the nominated position be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer who made the nomination continues to employ the applicant, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval. The Tribunal also considered the applications of the second and third named applicants, who were family members of the first applicant.
The Tribunal found that while the nomination was not approved at the time of the delegate's decision, a subsequent review application by the employer resulted in the Tribunal setting aside the refusal and approving the nomination on 4 April 2019. Based on this and other evidence, the Tribunal was satisfied that all subclauses of clause 187.233 were met. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria, with a direction that the first applicant met clause 187.233. The applications of the second and third applicants were to be determined by reference to the outcome of the first applicant's application.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 187.233, which requires, among other things, that the nominated position be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer who made the nomination continues to employ the applicant, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval. The Tribunal also considered the applications of the second and third named applicants, who were family members of the first applicant.
The Tribunal found that while the nomination was not approved at the time of the delegate's decision, a subsequent review application by the employer resulted in the Tribunal setting aside the refusal and approving the nomination on 4 April 2019. Based on this and other evidence, the Tribunal was satisfied that all subclauses of clause 187.233 were met. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria, with a direction that the first applicant met clause 187.233. The applications of the second and third applicants were to be determined by reference to the outcome of the first applicant's application.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Li (Migration) [2019] AATA 1168
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0