Saha (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr Saha, who sought review of a decision not to grant him and his secondary applicant a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa under the Direct Entry stream. The core of the dispute was whether the applicant had been the subject of an approved nomination for the position he sought to be sponsored for.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the lodgement and approval of a nomination for a position. This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, and that certain conditions regarding the employer, the nomination's validity, and the timing of the visa application relative to the nomination approval must be met.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied clause 187.233. The applicant's evidence indicated that his migration agent had organised a nomination application with a company that subsequently ceased operations. The agent then lodged a new nomination application with a different sponsor without the applicant's consent. Crucially, the Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence of an approved nomination for the position in relation to which the applicant had applied for the visa. Consequently, as the primary applicant failed to meet the criteria, the secondary applicant also failed to meet the requirements under clause 187.311(a).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants.