Mirza (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa under the Direct Entry stream. The applicant's claim was based on a nominated position as a Retail Manager, which required the approval of the nomination application. The core dispute revolved around whether this nomination had been validly approved and met the specific criteria set out in the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements for a Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, specifically focusing on whether the nominated position had been approved and met the conditions stipulated in clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. This included assessing whether the nominator was the prospective employer, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was lodged within six months of the nomination approval.

The Tribunal's reasoning centred on the applicant's failure to demonstrate that the nomination for the Retail Manager position had been approved. Despite being provided with opportunities to comment and attend a hearing, the applicant and their representative did not appear before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had responded affirmatively to a declaration regarding a lodged nomination but had not provided evidence of its approval. Given that the approval of the nomination is a primary criterion for this visa subclass, and this criterion was not met, the Tribunal affirmed the original decision not to grant the visa.