Patel (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, by the first applicant, with the second and third applicants seeking to be included as family members. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the nominated position, as required by clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994, had been approved at the time of the Tribunal's decision. A further issue arose regarding the Tribunal's decision to proceed without granting an adjournment, despite the applicant not having responded to information provided by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination. The evidence before the Tribunal indicated that the nomination lodged by Dreamland (Australia) Pty Ltd on behalf of the first applicant had not been approved. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the first applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 187.233. The Tribunal also affirmed the decision not to grant the visa to the second and third applicants, as they did not meet the secondary criteria for family members and had not demonstrated they met the primary criteria in their own right. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants the visas.