Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, under the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant sought review of a decision by the Department of Immigration to refuse the visa. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was an approved nomination for the position offered to the applicant. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which outlines the requirements for an approved nomination in the Temporary Residence Transition stream. This included whether the nomination had been approved, not withdrawn, and if there was any adverse information concerning the nominator.

The Tribunal found that the Department had refused the Company's nomination application, and this decision was affirmed on review by the Tribunal. The applicants failed to provide any response or comment on this information. As the nomination application had not been approved, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria in cl.186.223(2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Subclass 186 visa to the primary applicant and also affirmed the refusal of visas for the secondary applicants (spouse and children) as they did not meet the relevant secondary criteria.