Rees-Davies (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicants against a decision of the Tribunal affirming the refusal to grant them Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, specifically under the Subclass 187 Direct Entry stream. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicants met the requirements of clauses 187.223 and 187.311 of the Migration Regulations 1994, with a particular focus on clause 187.223(3).

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, specifically concerning the requirement for an approved nomination. This involved determining if the position to which the visa application related was the subject of an approved nomination, as stipulated by the relevant regulations. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the applicants had provided adequate comments or responses to information that the Tribunal considered would lead to the affirmation of the decision under review.

The Tribunal reasoned that for applicants in the Direct Entry stream, clause 187.223(3) requires that the nomination for the position be approved and not subsequently withdrawn. In this case, the Tribunal had previously affirmed a decision refusing the approval of the nomination made by the Trustee for Gracie Family Discretionary Trust in respect of the applicant. As the nomination had been refused, this essential criterion was not met. Furthermore, the Tribunal had invited the applicants to comment on this information, but they failed to provide a response within the prescribed period. Consequently, the Tribunal proceeded to make a decision without further comment, as permitted by section 359C of the Migration Act 1958.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, concluding that the requirements for the Direct Entry stream had not been met due to the refusal of the nomination.