Sidhu (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr. Sidhu, the applicant, who sought to appeal a decision not to grant him a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the position for which Mr. Sidhu applied was the subject of an approved nomination as required by the relevant migration regulations.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether the applicant met the criteria set out in clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause, as applicable, required, among other things, that the position be the subject of an approved nomination, that the nominator be the intended employer, that the nomination had not been withdrawn, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the fact that the nomination lodged by Slora Fuels Pty Ltd was refused on 13 December 2017. Although Slora Fuels Pty Ltd applied for a review of this refusal, they subsequently withdrew their application for review on 14 July 2020, which was accepted by the Tribunal. The applicant confirmed his understanding of these facts and acknowledged that there was no evidence before the Tribunal that the position was the subject of an approved nomination. Despite the applicant's submissions regarding the circumstances of the nomination refusal and his personal situation, the Tribunal found that the essential criterion of an approved nomination had not been met.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, as the first applicant did not meet the criteria in cl.187.233 and the secondary applicant did not meet the criteria in cl.187.311.