Nguyen (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 4451

26 September 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Nguyen (Migration) [2019] AATA 4451 [2019] AATA 4451 26 September 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, for a Telecommunications Technical Officer. The applicant's nomination had been approved by the Tribunal, which then considered whether the applicant met criterion cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nominated position met the requirements of cl.187.233, which included that the position be the subject of an approved nomination, located in regional Australia, and identified the applicant. Further, the employer making the nomination must be the prospective employer, the nomination must have been approved and not withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons, the position must remain available to the applicant, and the visa application must have been made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the nominator, HHOM Pty Ltd, met the requirements for nomination approval. It was satisfied that HHOM Pty Ltd would employ the applicant, that no adverse information was known to Immigration, that the position remained available as the applicant was employed in it, and that the visa application was made within the prescribed timeframe. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that criterion cl.187.233 was met.

Given these findings, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria, with a direction that the applicant meets criterion cl.187.233.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Remedies

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0