Qureshi (Migration)
[2021] AATA 1960
•11 May 2021
Qureshi (Migration) [2021] AATA 1960 (11 May 2021)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANTS: Mr Abdul Naveed Qureshi
Ms Suraya Parveen
Master Ammar Naveed Qureshi
Master Sharjeel Naveed
Mrs Saima Naveed QureshiCASE NUMBER: 1822037
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S): BCC2017/1787886
MEMBER:R. Skaros
DATE:11 May 2021
PLACE OF DECISION: Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:
·cl 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Statement made on 11 May 2021 at 1:59pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme – Direct Entry stream – position of Marketing Specialist – nomination approved upon review – decision under review remitted
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 187.233STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicants Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicants applied for the visas on 19 May 2017. At the time of application, Class RN contained one subclass: Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme).
The criteria for a Subclass 187 visa are set out in Part 187 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (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 two alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, or the Direct Entry stream.
In the present case, the first named applicant (the applicant) is seeking the visa in the Direct Entry stream, to work in the nominated position of Marketing Specialist (ANZCO 225113).
The delegate refused to grant the visas because the applicant did not meet cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the Department did not approve the application for the nominated position made by the applicant’s sponsor, Smart Workz Pty Ltd.
The Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary as it was able to find in favour of the applicant on the material before it.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The issue in the present case is whether the applicant was the subject of an approved nomination as required by cl.187.233(3).
Nomination of a position
Clause 187.233 as applicable in this case is set out in full in an attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that that the position to which the application relates be the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration made as part of the current visa application. In addition, where the associated nomination was made on or after 1 July 2017, it must identify the applicant in relation to the position. In addition, this criterion also requires that the person who will employ the applicant is the person who made nomination and that the nomination has been approved.
In this case the nomination lodged by the applicant’s sponsor, being the nomination referred to in paragraph 187.233(1), was refused by a delegate of the Minister. The applicant was advised of this on 31 May 2018. However, the applicant did not respond to this information. The delegate refused to grant the visa to the applicants finding that the first named applicant did not meet cl.187.233(3).
On 14 April 2021 the Tribunal set aside the decision of the Department to refuse the nomination, and substituted a decision approving the nomination. As such, the applicant is now subject to an approved nomination, and the Tribunal is satisfied that cl.187.233(3) is met.
Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa applications to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.
DECISION
The Tribunal remits the applications Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa:
·cl 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
R. Skaros
Senior MemberATTACHMENT A
187.233(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:
(i)subparagraph 5.19(4)(h)(ii); or
(ii)subregulation 5.19(4) as in force before 1 July 2012; and
(b)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114C(3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.
(2) The person who will employ the applicant is the person who made the nomination.
(3) The Minister has approved the nomination.
(4) The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.
(4A) 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.
(5) The position is still available to the applicant.
(6) The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
0
0
0