Singh (Migration)

This matter concerns an appeal before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal regarding the refusal of Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas. The primary applicant, Mr. Singh, sought to have his visa application approved based on a nomination for the position of Graphic Pre-press Trades Worker by the Trustee for the Sunny’s Family Trust. His family members were included as secondary applicants.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nomination associated with Mr. Singh's visa application had been approved, as required by clause 186.233 of the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination, that the nominator must be the prospective employer, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Further requirements include the absence of adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, the continued availability of the position, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa. It noted that the nomination by the Trustee for the Sunny’s Family Trust had been refused by the Department on 19 May 2018. Subsequently, the Tribunal itself affirmed this refusal on review on 29 January 2021. The applicant's explanation that business uncertainties, including a separation of the directors and the eventual closure of the business, led to his departure from employment in June 2018, and his hope for future sponsorship, did not overcome the fundamental requirement that the nomination itself had not been approved. As the primary applicant did not meet the essential criteria for the visa, and there was no evidence that the secondary applicants met these criteria independently, the Tribunal also affirmed the decision in respect of them.