Salad (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Subclass 186 Direct Entry stream. The applicant, Fartun Farah Salad, along with several secondary applicants, sought this visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had met the requirement of being the subject of an approved nomination for the position.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria set out in clause 186.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that for the Direct Entry stream, the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, and specific conditions regarding the employer, the availability of the position, and the timing of the visa application relative to the nomination approval must be met. The Tribunal also considered whether it was appropriate to make a decision without further input from the applicants, given the provision of adverse information.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the fact that the nomination lodged by Best Friend Family Day Care Pty Ltd ATF Best Friend Family Trust had been refused on 21 October 2016, and this refusal was subsequently affirmed by the Tribunal on 16 March 2018. As the nomination was refused, it could not be considered an approved nomination as required by clause 186.233. The Tribunal noted that it had provided the applicants with an opportunity to comment on adverse information, including the refusal of the nomination, but had received no response. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the essential criteria for the grant of the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas to the applicants. The Tribunal found that neither the primary applicant nor the secondary applicants met the necessary criteria for the visa.