Middha (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal before the Migration Review Tribunal regarding a Subclass 187 Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa application. The applicant sought review after the Department refused their visa application. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nominated position met the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nominated position was the subject of an approved nomination, whether the employer was the nominator, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, if the position remained available to the applicant, and if the visa application was lodged within six months of the nomination approval. The Tribunal also needed to assess the credibility of the evidence presented by the applicant and supporting witnesses.

The Tribunal found the evidence presented by the applicant and witnesses to be credible and honest. Applying clause 187.233, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nominated position for Retail Manager was the same as that in the visa application and that the nominator was the prospective employer. Crucially, the Tribunal set aside the Department's decision and substituted its own decision, approving the nomination for the position. Based on this approval, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria, with a specific direction that the applicant satisfies clause 187.233.