Park (Migration)

[2021] AATA 199

Park (Migration) [2021] AATA 199 (28 January 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Sungwoo Park
Ms Seung Kyoung Oh
Mr Yangho Park
Mr Sehun Park

CASE NUMBER:  1814777

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2016/2551020

MEMBER:Michelle East

DATE:28 January 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Perth

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

Statement made on 28 January 2021 at 1:00pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) – direct entry stream – subject of approved position nomination – refusal of related nomination application set aside on review – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 5.19, Schedule 2, cl 187.233

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicants Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicants applied for the visas on 2 August 2016. At the time of application, Class RN contained one subclass: Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme).

3. The criteria for a Subclass 187 visa are set out in Part 187 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria. Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria must meet the 'Common criteria', as well as the criteria of one of two alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, or the Direct Entry stream.

4. In the present case, the first named applicant (the applicant) is seeking the visa in the Direct Entry stream, to work in the nominated position of Cook.

5. The delegate refused to grant the visas because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the nomination in relation to the applicant had been refused.

6. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 28 January 2021 by MS Teams video to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from his sponsor, Ms Lim. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Korean and English languages.

7. The applicants were represented in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

8. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

9. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets the requirements of cl.187.233.

   Nomination of a position

10. Clause 187.233 as applicable in this case is set out in full in an attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that that the position to which the application relates be the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration made as part of the current visa application. In addition, where the associated nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017, it must identify the applicant in relation to the position.

11. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made nomination

    ·the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn

    ·there is no ‘adverse information’ known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person ‘associated with’ that person (within the meaning of reg 1.13A and reg 1.13B); or it is reasonable to disregard any such information

    ·the position is still available to the applicant, and

    ·the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

12. The applicant was nominated by ONP Pty Ltd for the position of Cook.  The position is the same as in the 5.19 nomination application and the employer is the nominator.

13. The nomination was initially refused by the Department.  However, on 28 January 2021 this Tribunal made a decision to set aside the refusal and substituted a decision approving the nomination.

14. The Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination has not been withdrawn and that the position is still available to the applicant.  The Tribunal is also satisfied that the visa application was not made more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

15. There is no evidence before the Tribunal suggesting the possibility of an employer sponsor breach known to the Department about the nominator.

16. Given the above, the Tribunal finds that the applicant meets all the requirements of cl.187.233.

17. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

18. The Tribunal remits the applications for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:

    ·cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

    Michelle East
    Member

    
    

    ATTACHMENT A

    187.233(1)     The position to which the application relates is the position:

    (a)nominated in an application for approval that seeks to meet the requirements of:

    (i)subparagraph 5.19(4)(h)(ii); or

    (ii)subregulation 5.19(4) as in force before 1 July 2012; and

    (b)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114C(3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.

    (2)     The person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the nomination.

    (3)     The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (4)     The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (4A)    Either:

    (a)there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person; or

    (b)it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person.

    (5)     The position is still available to the applicant.

    (6)     The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.