Singh (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 4708
•4 July 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Singh (Migration) [2019] AATA 4708
[2019] AATA 4708
4 July 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse his visa application.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had an approved standard business sponsor, which was a requirement under clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. This clause stipulated several conditions, including that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer must be the nominator, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Additionally, it required that the position remain available to the applicant and that the visa application be lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence, which indicated he was not currently working for the nominated employer, "Green Olive Pty Ltd," and had no current sponsor. The applicant confirmed he had received legal advice suggesting that if the nomination were approved, the visa would be granted, but he also stated he had no current sponsor. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided evidence of an approved standard business sponsorship with his current employer, nor had he met the requirements of clause 187.233. As the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had an approved standard business sponsor, which was a requirement under clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations. This clause stipulated several conditions, including that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination, that the employer must be the nominator, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Additionally, it required that the position remain available to the applicant and that the visa application be lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence, which indicated he was not currently working for the nominated employer, "Green Olive Pty Ltd," and had no current sponsor. The applicant confirmed he had received legal advice suggesting that if the nomination were approved, the visa would be granted, but he also stated he had no current sponsor. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided evidence of an approved standard business sponsorship with his current employer, nor had he met the requirements of clause 187.233. As the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Singh (Migration) [2019] AATA 4708
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0