Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa (Subclass 187) in the Direct Entry stream. The applicant was the nominee for the position of Retail Manager, with the nomination made by Surgan Pty Ltd. The delegate of the Minister had refused the nominator's application for approval of the nominated position, a decision which was subsequently affirmed by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa in the Direct Entry stream, specifically in light of the refusal of the employer's nomination. The relevant criteria, as set out in cl.187.233, required, among other things, that the nominated position be approved and not subsequently withdrawn, that there be no adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons, that the position remain available, and that the visa application be made within six months of the nomination's approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that the refusal of the employer's nomination was a critical factor. Following the Tribunal's affirmation of the delegate's decision to refuse the nomination, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant under s.359A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), inviting comments on this decision as it could impact the review of the visa application. The applicant failed to provide the requested information by the deadline, and no extension was granted. Consequently, the Tribunal applied s.359C and s.360(3) of the Act, determining that the applicant was not entitled to appear before the Tribunal and proceeding to a decision without further information. As the essential criteria for the visa, particularly those relating to the approved nomination, had not been met due to the refusal and the applicant's lack of response, the Tribunal affirmed the original decision.