Lozada (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 1271

14 January 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Lozada (Migration) [2019] AATA 1271 [2019] AATA 1271 14 January 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 Massage Therapist. The applicant was nominated by Museo Hair Body Health Pty Ltd. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements of cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the nomination met all the stipulated criteria under cl.187.233. This included whether the nominated position was correctly identified, if the employer was the nominator, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was lodged within the prescribed timeframe after nomination approval.

The Tribunal found that the nomination was made by Museo Hair Body Health Pty Ltd for the position of Massage Therapist, and this was the same position as in the nomination application, with the employer acting as the nominator. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that a previous refusal of the nomination had been set aside by the Tribunal on 14 January 2019, and the nomination was then approved. The Tribunal was satisfied that the nomination had not been withdrawn, the position remained available, and the visa application was made within six months of the nomination approval. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no evidence of adverse information known to the Department regarding the nominator or associated persons.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met all the requirements of cl.187.233. The Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria. The applications of secondary applicants, who applied as members of the first applicant's family unit, were to be determined by reference to the outcome of the primary applicant's application upon remittal.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Jurisdiction

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

  • Appeal

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0