Manpreet Singh (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 3105
•20 May 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Manpreet Singh (Migration) [2019] AATA 3105
[2019] AATA 3105
20 May 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision to refuse a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, for the applicant, Manpreet Singh. The applicant's nominating employer, Leny & Khan Pty Ltd, had applied for approval of a nomination for the position of Cook in respect of the applicant.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was an approved nomination for the applicant's position, as required by clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer who made the nomination must be the prospective employer, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Further requirements include the absence of adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, the continued availability of the position, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal reasoned that the employer's application for approval of the nomination was refused by a delegate of the Minister. Although the employer sought review of this refusal, their application was subsequently dismissed by the Tribunal due to non-appearance at a scheduled hearing. As a result, the nomination was not approved and had been dismissed. The Tribunal notified the applicant of this information and invited comment, explaining that an unapproved nomination meant the applicant could not satisfy a key visa requirement, necessitating the affirmation of the original decision.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 187 visa. The Tribunal also noted that because the primary applicant could not satisfy the criteria, any secondary applicants, who were family members, also failed to satisfy their respective criteria and their applications were likewise affirmed.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was an approved nomination for the applicant's position, as required by clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer who made the nomination must be the prospective employer, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Further requirements include the absence of adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, the continued availability of the position, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal reasoned that the employer's application for approval of the nomination was refused by a delegate of the Minister. Although the employer sought review of this refusal, their application was subsequently dismissed by the Tribunal due to non-appearance at a scheduled hearing. As a result, the nomination was not approved and had been dismissed. The Tribunal notified the applicant of this information and invited comment, explaining that an unapproved nomination meant the applicant could not satisfy a key visa requirement, necessitating the affirmation of the original decision.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 187 visa. The Tribunal also noted that because the primary applicant could not satisfy the criteria, any secondary applicants, who were family members, also failed to satisfy their respective criteria and their applications were likewise affirmed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
-
Natural Justice
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2002] FCA 617
Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
[2012] FMCA 28
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li
[2013] HCA 18