Ma (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought to have a decision affirmed by the Tribunal, which had refused the applicant's visa application on the basis that a required nomination had not been approved. The nominator had also sought review of the refusal of the nomination, but the Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction to review that decision because the nominating business had been deregistered.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically whether there was an approved nomination for the position. Clause 187.233, as applicable, requires, among other things, that the position be the subject of an approved nomination in regional Australia, that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, and that there is no adverse information known to Immigration, or that such information is reasonable to disregard.

The Tribunal reasoned that because the nomination application was refused and the subsequent attempt to review that refusal failed due to the deregistration of the nominating business, the nomination was never approved. Consequently, the requirement under cl.187.233(3) that the nomination be approved could not be met. As the applicant had only sought to satisfy the criteria for the Direct Entry stream and had failed to meet this essential requirement, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.