RADIM (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 2142

5 April 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
RADIM (Migration) [2019] AATA 2142 [2019] AATA 2142 5 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Subclass 186 Employer Nomination Scheme, Direct Entry Stream. The nominated position was Accountant (General) (ANZSCO 221111). The decision under review was made by a Tribunal, with Lilly Mojsin acting as the Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants met the requirements of clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination that has not been withdrawn, that the employer who made the nomination is the one who will employ the applicant, and that there is no adverse information known to the Department of Immigration about the nominator or associated persons, or that such information can be disregarded. Additionally, the position must remain available to the applicant, and the visa application must have been lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal found that the nomination by Bajrang Pty Ltd atf Chaukra Family Trust for the Accountant (General) position had been approved and had not been withdrawn. It was satisfied, based on the evidence presented, that no adverse information was known to Immigration concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remained available, and that the visa application was lodged within the prescribed timeframe. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 186.223 was met.

The Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details

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