Singh (Migration)

[2024] AATA 693

Singh (Migration) [2024] AATA 693 (22 March 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Manpreet Singh

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr Pawan Kumar Bhambi (MARN: 0801321)

CASE NUMBER:  2104145

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/4628665

MEMBER:Angela Julian-Armitage

DATE:22 March 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa.

Statement made on 22 March 2024 at 11:28am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa – Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage) – medium-term stream – motor mechanic (general) – related position nomination withdrawn – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulation 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 482.212(1)

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 12 March 2021 to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 22 October 2018. At that time, Class GK contained one subclass: Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage). The criteria for a Subclass 482 visa are set out in Part 482 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa must meet the ‘Common criteria’ and the criteria of one of three alternative streams: the Short-term stream, the Medium-term stream, or the Labour Agreement stream. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria. In the present case, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Medium-term stream to work in the nominated occupation of Motor Mechanic (General)- ANZSCO 321211.

3. The delegate in this case refused to grant the visa on the basis that the visa applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl 482.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the entity that made the nomination namely the visa applicant’s employer, had withdrawn its nomination for the position and applicant on 17 November 2023.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 19 March 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Punjabi and English languages.

5. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided that the decision  under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

6. The issue in this case is whether the provisions of Cl 482.212 of Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations has been satisfied.

   Requirement for an approved nomination

7. Clause 482.212(1) requires that the nomination identified in the visa application is approved, was made by a person who was an approved work sponsor at the time of approval and has not ceased.

8. As mentioned above, the sponsoring employer withdrew the visa applicant’s nomination on 17 November 2023.

9. For this reason, the requirements of cl 482.212(1) are not met.

10. As one of the essential requirements for the visa is not met, the decision under review must be affirmed.

    DECISION

11. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa.

    Angela Julian-Armitage
    Member