Momen (Migration)

This matter concerned a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision to refuse an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant sought to have the visa granted based on a nomination made by Tasne Enterprise Pty Ltd. The Tribunal was constituted by Member R. Skaros.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the associated nomination for the visa had been approved, as required by clause 186.223 of the relevant regulations. This clause stipulated that the nomination must have been approved by the Minister and not subsequently withdrawn, and that there should be no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons, among other conditions.

The Tribunal reasoned that departmental records indicated the nomination was refused on 24 October 2017, and the applicant did not respond to a subsequent natural justice letter. Although the nominator had lodged a review of the nomination refusal, this review was withdrawn. At a hearing, the applicant expressed grievances about his employer, including delayed payments and termination of employment, and claimed to have been deceived. However, the Tribunal explained that the legislation did not permit consideration of the nominator's conduct in determining whether the nomination itself had been approved. As the nomination had been refused and the review withdrawn, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the requirement of clause 186.223(2). The Tribunal also affirmed the decision in respect of a secondary applicant, who was a member of the first applicant's family unit, as the primary applicant did not meet the visa requirements.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas.