Mora Jurado (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme), specifically the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The dispute arose after the employer's nomination was refused, and this refusal was subsequently confirmed on review by the Tribunal. The first applicant sought review of the decision to refuse the visa, while the second applicant had withdrawn their application for review. The decision was made by Amanda Mendes Da Costa, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the first applicant was the subject of an approved nomination for the position of Customer Service Manager, as required by clause 186.223 of the applicable regulations. This clause necessitates that the nomination has been approved and not subsequently withdrawn, that there is no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remains available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that the employer's application for nomination approval, lodged on 25 January 2017, was refused by a delegate of the Department on 10 July 2017. This refusal was affirmed by the Tribunal on 6 January 2020. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the first applicant did not have an approved nomination that had not been withdrawn, meaning clause 186.223 was not met. As the applicant had only sought to satisfy the criteria for the Temporary Residence Transition stream and had failed to meet these requirements, the decision under review was affirmed. Regarding the second applicant, the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction due to the withdrawal of their application for review.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the first named applicant an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa and stated it had no jurisdiction in respect of the second named applicant.