Sahin (Migration)

[2021] AATA 5361

Sahin (Migration) [2021] AATA 5361 (22 December 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Guluzar Sahin

REPRESENTATIVE:  Ms Sarah Loch-Wilkinson (MARN: 0850888)

CASE NUMBER:  1901109

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/2715308

MEMBER:Alison Mercer

DATE:22 December 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

·cl 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 22 December 2021 at 1:24pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa – Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) – Temporary Residence Transition stream – Chef – subject of an approved nomination – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65

Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl. 186.223

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 10 January 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 20 July 2018. At the time of application, Class EN contained one subclass: subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme).

3. The criteria for the grant of a subclass 186 visa are set out in Part 186 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 three alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, the Direct Entry stream, or the Labour Agreement stream.

4. In the present case, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Temporary Residence Transition stream, to work in the nominated position of Chef (ANZSCO code 351311).

5. The delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet cl 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which required (amongst other things) that she was the subject of an approved nomination by her Australian employer. The delegate found that the nomination of the applicant by her employer, Greenwood Manors Pty Ltd, had been refused by the Department on 12 December 2018. The delegate found that the applicant had not claimed to meet the requirements of any of the alternative streams and thus could not be granted a subclass 186 visa.

6. The Tribunal received a review application from the applicant on 17 January 2019. It was accompanied by a copy of the delegate’s decision and an authority by which she appointed a registered migration agent, Ms Sarah Loch-Wilkinson, as her representative and authorised recipient for correspondence.

7. In reaching its decision, the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicant on the basis of the material before it, pursuant to section 360(2)(a) of the Act.

8. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

   Nomination of a position

9. Clause 186.223 as applicable in this case is set out in full in the attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that the position to which the application relates is the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Temporary Residence Transition stream that identifies the visa applicant. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration that was required to be made as part of the current visa application.

10. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

    • the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn
    • there is no ‘adverse information’ known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person ‘associated with’ that person (within the meaning of reg 1.13A and reg 1.13B); or it is reasonable to disregard any such information
    • the position is still available to the applicant, and
    • the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

11. The Department's records indicate that the applicant's employer, Greenwood Manors Pty Ltd, made an application to have the position of Chef approved, with the applicant as the nominee, with the Department on 19 July 2018.

12. This nomination application was refused on 12 December 2018 and the employer sought review of that decision with the Tribunal on 28 December 2018. On 22 December 2021, the Tribunal (as presently constituted) set aside the Department's decision to refuse to approve the nomination and substituted a decision to approve the nomination by Greenwood Manors Pty Ltd (see AAT/MRD decision 1838031 of 22 December 2021).

13. Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied that:

    • the person (in this case, business) that will employ the applicant is Greenwood Manors Pty Ltd, who made the nomination application;
    • that nomination has been approved and has not been withdrawn;
    • from a review of the Department's Integrated Client Services Environment electronic records, and based on findings made in the Tribunal’s decision in 1838031 for the nomination review, there is no 'adverse information' known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person 'associated with' that person (within the meaning of r.1.13A and r.1.13B);
    • the position is still available to the applicant; and
    • the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

14. Therefore, the Tribunal finds that cl.186.223 is met by the applicant.

15. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

16. The Tribunal remits the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

    • cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Alison Mercer
    Member

    
    

    ATTACHMENT A

    186.223(1)     The position to which the application relates is the position:

    (a)nominated in an application for approval that:

    (i)identifies the applicant in relation to the position; and

    (ii)is made in relation to a visa in a Temporary Residence Transition stream; and

    (c)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114B(3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.

    (2)     The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (3)     The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (3A)    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.

    (4)     The position is still available to the applicant.

    (5)     The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.