Liyanage (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, in the direct entry stream. The applicant sought to be employed as a real estate representative. The primary dispute revolved around the approval of the nominated position, which was a prerequisite for the visa application. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the relevant criteria for the visa, particularly concerning the approved nomination.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the nominated position had been approved by the Minister and whether this approval was still valid at the time of the visa application. The Tribunal also had to consider the status of the family members included in the application, who relied on the primary applicant meeting the visa criteria.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the fact that the associated nomination application had been refused by the Department and this refusal was subsequently affirmed by the Tribunal on 13 September 2023. The Tribunal had invited the applicant to comment on the lack of an approved nomination, which was a critical requirement under clause 187.233(3). As no response was received from the applicant, the Tribunal found that the nomination had not been approved. Consequently, the primary applicant could not satisfy clause 187.233(3), and as the other applicants were family members relying on the primary applicant, they could not satisfy clause 187.311.

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