Sacramento (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, Subclass 187 (Temporary Residence Transition stream). The primary dispute revolved around whether the visa applicants met the necessary criteria for the grant of these visas, specifically concerning the nomination of a Motor Mechanic (General) position by the employer, Emanuele Bros Pty Ltd. The Tribunal was tasked with reviewing the decision not to grant the visas.

The legal issues before the Tribunal included whether the nominated position met the requirements of clause 187.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, including whether the nomination had been approved and not withdrawn, whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, and whether the position was located in regional Australia and remained available to the applicant. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the visa application was made within the prescribed timeframe after the nomination approval.

The Tribunal considered the evidence and submissions presented. It found that the nominated position of Motor Mechanic (General) ANZSCO 321211 met the requirements of clause 187.223(1) and that the employer's submissions confirmed the nomination had not been withdrawn and the position remained available, satisfying clauses 187.223(3) and 187.223(5). The Tribunal was also satisfied that the position was located in regional Australia, fulfilling clause 187.223(4), and that no relevant adverse information was known concerning the nominator. However, the Tribunal noted a previous decision on 28 February 2019 which affirmed a decision that the nominating employer could not meet the requirements of subregulation 5.19(3). Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that without an approved nomination, the applicants could not satisfy clause 187.223(2), and therefore could not meet the necessary criteria for the grant of the visas.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants the Subclass 187 visas, finding that the secondary visa applicants were unable to satisfy clause 187.311.