Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, by Mr. Singh and his secondary applicant. The dispute arose when the nominator, S and R Mutual Services Pty Ltd, withdrew its nomination application on 13 December 2018. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for the visa, specifically clause 187.233, which pertains to the nominated position.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had an approved standard business sponsor and whether the nominated position met the requirements of clause 187.233. This clause mandates that the position be the subject of an approved nomination in regional Australia, that the nominator be the prospective employer, and that the nomination has not been withdrawn. It also requires that the position remains available to the applicant and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the visa. The applicant conceded that he did not have an approved standard business sponsor and acknowledged his understanding of this requirement. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that the nomination lodged by S and R Mutual Services Pty Ltd had been withdrawn. As clause 187.233(4) explicitly requires that a nomination has not been subsequently withdrawn, this criterion was not met. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements for the visa in the Direct Entry stream.

As the primary applicant failed to meet the necessary criteria, the secondary applicant, as a member of the family unit, also did not satisfy the relevant requirements, specifically clause 187.311. Therefore, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to the applicants.