SINGH (Migration)
Case
•
[2020] AATA 230
•31 January 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
SINGH (Migration) [2020] AATA 230
[2020] AATA 230
31 January 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream, by Mr Iqbal Singh. The applicant's nominator, Annilax Enterprises P/L (T/A Namaste Indian Cuisine), lodged a nomination application on 15 August 2017 for the position of Cook. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to consider the delegate's refusal of the visa application.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to the nomination of the position. The delegate had refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not meet this criterion, as the nomination had been refused at the time of the delegate's decision. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria under the Temporary Residence Transition Stream and the Agreement Stream, neither of which were satisfied due to the nomination not being assessed under the relevant subregulations.
The Tribunal reasoned that while the delegate had refused the nomination application, the Tribunal itself subsequently approved the nomination by decision dated 31 January 2020. This subsequent approval meant that the applicant now satisfied clause 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Given this finding, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate course of action was to remit the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for the visa. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met the criteria under cl.187.233(3).
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to the nomination of the position. The delegate had refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not meet this criterion, as the nomination had been refused at the time of the delegate's decision. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria under the Temporary Residence Transition Stream and the Agreement Stream, neither of which were satisfied due to the nomination not being assessed under the relevant subregulations.
The Tribunal reasoned that while the delegate had refused the nomination application, the Tribunal itself subsequently approved the nomination by decision dated 31 January 2020. This subsequent approval meant that the applicant now satisfied clause 187.233(3) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Given this finding, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate course of action was to remit the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for the visa. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met the criteria under cl.187.233(3).
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
SINGH (Migration) [2020] AATA 230
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0