Prince (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 1421

2 January 2019


Prince (Migration) [2019] AATA 1421 (2 January 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Robert Prince
Ms Sorelle Prince
Miss Isobel Prince
Miss Erin Prince

CASE NUMBER:  1709910

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):           BCC2016/2909205

MEMBER:Sheridan Lee

DATE:2 January 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

·cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 02 January 2019 at 3:54pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa – Subclass 186 Employer Nomination Scheme – Temporary Residence Transition stream – position of Sales Representative (Industrial Products) – nomination approved upon review – decision under review remitted      

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cls 186.223, 186.233; r 1.13

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 Immigration and Border Protection on 5 May 2017 to refuse to grant the applicants Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

  2. The applicants applied for the visas on 1 September 2016. At the time of application, Class EN contained one subclass: Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme).

  3. The criteria for the grant of a Subclass 186 visa are set out in Part 186 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (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 three alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, the Direct Entry stream, or the Labour Agreement stream.

  4. In the present case, the first named applicant (the applicant) is seeking the visa in Temporary Residence Transition stream, to work in the nominated position of Sales Representative (Industrial Products).

  5. The delegate refused to grant the visas because the applicant did not meet cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the nomination application lodged by the applicant’s employer, Baluff Pty Ltd, was refused.

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

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

    CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

    Nomination of a position

  8. Clause 186.223 as applicable in this case is set out in full in the attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that the position to which the application relates is the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Temporary Residence Transition stream that identifies the visa applicant. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration that was required to be made as part of the current visa application.

  9. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    ·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 r.1.13A and r.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.

  10. The applicant’s nominating employer, Balluff Pty Ltd, applied to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (now the Department of Home Affairs) for the approval of the position of Sales Representative (Industrial Products) in respect of the applicant. On 22 February 2017, the Department refused to approve the nomination and the employer subsequently applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision.

  11. On 2 January 2019, the Tribunal set aside the Department’s decision and substituted a decision to approve the nomination in respect of the applicant. As the relevant nomination has now been approved, the applicant meets the requirement in cl. 186.223(2).

  12. The nomination has not been subsequently withdrawn.

  13. Having regard to the information on the related Tribunal file in respect of the nomination application, the Tribunal is satisfied that there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person. The Tribunal is also satisfied on the basis of the supporting documents and the evidence provided by the employer at the hearing in respect of the nomination that the position is still available to the applicant.

  14. The visa application was made at the same time as the employer nomination and was therefore not made more than 6 months after the approval of the nomination.

  15. Accordingly, cl.186.233 is met.

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

  17. As the second, third and fourth named applicants applied on the basis of being a member of the family unit of the first named applicant, their application will be determined by reference to the outcome of the first named applicant’s application on remittal to the Department for reconsideration.

    DECISION

  18. The Tribunal remits the applications Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

    ·cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Sheridan Lee
    Member


    ATTACHMENT A

    186.223(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 subregulation 5.19(3); and

    (b)in relation to which the applicant is identified as the holder of a Subclass 457 … visa; and

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

    (2)      The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (3)      The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (3A)    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.

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

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

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0