Pindoria (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 3014
•27 May 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Pindoria (Migration) [2019] AATA 3014
[2019] AATA 3014
27 May 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 the position of Accountant. The applicant's nomination had initially been refused by the Department. However, the Tribunal had previously set aside that refusal and substituted a decision approving the nomination. The current decision was made by Michelle East of the Tribunal.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to the nomination of a position for this visa subclass. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be located in regional Australia, that the employer who made the nomination is the prospective employer, that the nomination has been approved and not withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons (or such information is reasonable to disregard), that the position remains available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal found that the applicant met all the requirements of cl.187.233. It was satisfied that the nominated position was the same as that in the nomination application, the employer was the nominator, and the nomination had been approved by the Tribunal and not withdrawn. The Tribunal also found that the position remained available and the visa application was lodged within the prescribed timeframe. Furthermore, there was no evidence of adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant meets cl.187.233. The applications of any secondary applicants, who applied as members of the family unit of the primary applicant, were to be determined by reference to the outcome of the primary applicant's application upon remittal.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of cl.187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to the nomination of a position for this visa subclass. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be located in regional Australia, that the employer who made the nomination is the prospective employer, that the nomination has been approved and not withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons (or such information is reasonable to disregard), that the position remains available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal found that the applicant met all the requirements of cl.187.233. It was satisfied that the nominated position was the same as that in the nomination application, the employer was the nominator, and the nomination had been approved by the Tribunal and not withdrawn. The Tribunal also found that the position remained available and the visa application was lodged within the prescribed timeframe. Furthermore, there was no evidence of adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant meets cl.187.233. The applications of any secondary applicants, who applied as members of the family unit of the primary applicant, were to be determined by reference to the outcome of the primary applicant's application upon remittal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Pindoria (Migration) [2019] AATA 3014
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0