Patel (Migration)

This matter concerned a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, brought before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicants sought review of a decision concerning the approval of a nomination for a position, which was a prerequisite for the visa application. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nomination had been approved, as required by the relevant migration regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination for the position of Retail Manager (General) met the criteria set out in clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to ascertain if the nominated position was the same as that declared in the visa application, if the employer was the nominator, if the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, if there was no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, if the position remained available, and if the visa application was lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the employer's nomination application had initially been refused by a delegate, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had subsequently set aside that decision and substituted its own decision approving the appointment for the position. Based on the evidence presented, the Tribunal was satisfied that the approved position corresponded to the one nominated and declared in the visa application, and that the employer was indeed the nominator. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicants met the requirements of clause 187.233.

Given these findings, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met the criteria specified in clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.