SANGHERA (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Ms. Sanghera, who sought a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, under the Direct Entry stream. The core dispute revolved around whether Ms. Sanghera met the requirements for this visa, specifically concerning the nomination of her position.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations, which outlines the criteria for a nominated position in the Direct Entry stream. This clause mandates that the position must be the subject of an approved nomination, and for nominations made on or after 1 July 2017, the applicant must be specifically identified in that nomination. Further requirements include that the nominator must be the prospective employer, the nomination must have been approved and not withdrawn, there must be no adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, the position must remain available, and the visa application must be lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that a prerequisite for meeting clause 187.233 was the approval of the nomination. It noted that the applicant attended a hearing concerning the refusal of the nomination made by Silk Café Pty Ltd. Subsequently, on 18 July 2018, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the approval of this nomination. As the nomination had been refused, the Tribunal concluded that regulation 187.233(3) could not be met. Following this, the Tribunal invited the applicant to comment on information that would lead to affirming the decision, specifically referencing the refusal of the nomination and its relevance to the applicant meeting the visa criteria.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Ms. Sanghera the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, because the essential requirement of an approved nomination had not been satisfied.