Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas, subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, for a position as a Chef. The applicants sought review of a decision to refuse these visas.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicants met the criteria for the grant of the visas, specifically focusing on the requirement for an approved nomination for the position. This involved assessing whether the nominated position was located in regional Australia, whether the employer who made the nomination was the intended employer, and crucially, whether the nomination itself had been approved and not subsequently withdrawn. The Tribunal also considered whether there was any adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, and the timeliness of the visa application relative to the nomination approval.

The Tribunal's reasoning centred on the failure to meet the nomination requirements. It noted that while a declaration had been made regarding the nominated position and the employer was identified as the nominator, the nomination itself had not been approved. The Tribunal referred to a separate decision in an associated AAT case-file where the nomination was refused. Consequently, the Tribunal advised the applicants that without an approved nomination, they would not satisfy the necessary criteria under clause 187.233 for the grant of the visas.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas. It also found that the second applicant, identified as the spouse, did not satisfy clause 187.311 as they were not a member of the family unit of a person who held a subclass 187 visa granted on the basis of satisfying the primary criteria.