Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, direct entry stream, for a hotel or motel manager. The applicant sought to satisfy the criteria for this specific visa stream. The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, particularly concerning the nominated position and the approval of the nomination. The review was conducted by Karen McNamara, a member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the nominated position was the subject of an approved nomination, whether the nominating employer was the intended employer, and whether the nomination had been approved and not subsequently withdrawn. Further issues included whether there was adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, whether the position remained available to the applicant, and whether the visa application was made within six months of the nomination's approval. Crucially, the Tribunal also had to consider the applicant's response, or lack thereof, to invitations to attend a hearing and to comment on adverse information.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the fact that the associated nomination application had been refused, and this refusal was affirmed by the Tribunal on 17 August 2022. Furthermore, the nominating employer's Australian Business Number (ABN) had been cancelled from 22 July 2022. The Tribunal had invited the applicant to comment on this information, which indicated that the nomination might not have been approved, a prerequisite for the visa. Despite invitations to attend a hearing and to provide comments, the applicant or their authorised recipient did not respond. The Tribunal noted that it was unable to contact the applicant.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically regarding the approval of the nomination, and that the applicant's failure to respond to the Tribunal's communications meant that the Tribunal could not be satisfied that the criteria were met.