Parmar (Migration)

[2024] AATA 1164

Parmar (Migration) [2024] AATA 1164 (2 May 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Ravinder Singh Parmar

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Harmeet Uppal (MARN: 1680557)

CASE NUMBER:  2103464

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2020/614792

MEMBER:Angela Julian-Armitage

DATE:2 May 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa.

Statement made on 02 May 2024 at 2:04pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa – Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage) – short-term stream – cook – subject of approved position nomination – refusal of related nomination application affirmed on review – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cls 482.212(1), 482.312

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 on 3 March 2021 to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 28 February 2020. At that time, Class GK contained one subclass: Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage). The criteria for a Subclass 482 visa are set out in Part 482 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa must meet the ‘Common criteria’ and the criteria of one of three alternative streams: the Short-term stream, the Medium-term stream, or the Labour Agreement stream. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria. In this case, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Short-term stream to work in the nominated occupation of Cook.

3. The delegate in this case refused to grant the visa on the basis that the visa applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl 482.212 and 482.312 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the visa application was not supported by an approved nomination for the position the visa applicant was nominated to occupy.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 8 April 2024 and again on 12 April 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence  on the latter date from the managing director of the nominating entity.

5. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

6. The issue in this case is whether visa application is supported by an approved nomination for the position the visa applicant has been named to fill.

   Requirement for an approved nomination

7. Clause 482.212(1) requires that the nomination identified in the visa application is approved, was made by a person who was an approved work sponsor at the time of approval and has not ceased.

8. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate’s decision to not approved the subject nomination on 2 May 2024.

9. For that reason, the requirements of cl 482.212(1) are not met.

10. As one of the essential requirements for the visa is not met, the decision under review must be affirmed

    DECISION

11. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa.

    Angela Julian-Armitage
    Member