MULLICK (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr. Mullick and Mrs. Singh against the refusal to grant them Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas. The core dispute revolved around whether the nomination for Mr. Mullick's position as a Retail Buyer, made by Little Office, had been approved by the Minister, a prerequisite for the visa under clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. The Department had initially refused the nomination application.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Minister had approved the relevant nomination for the purposes of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This clause mandates that the nominated position must have been approved, not subsequently withdrawn, and that the visa application must have been made within six months of that approval. The Tribunal also considered whether the employer making the nomination was the same entity that would employ the applicant, and whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator.

The Tribunal reasoned that the critical issue was the factual existence of an approved nomination, as interpreted by the Full Federal Court in *Singh v MIBP*. The Court held that clause 187.233 refers to a specific, "once off" factual event: the approval of the nomination in relation to which the applicant made their visa declaration. Even a subsequent, new nomination for the same position by the same employer could not satisfy this criterion if it was not the nomination declared in the visa application. The Tribunal noted it had no discretion and must apply the law as stated.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visas. It found no evidence that the nomination had been approved, which was a mandatory requirement under the Regulations. Consequently, the applicants did not meet the primary requirements for the visa grant.