SINGH (Migration)

Case

[2018] AATA 2167

8 May 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
SINGH (Migration) [2018] AATA 2167 [2018] AATA 2167 8 May 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), Direct Entry stream. The applicant's nominating employer, Suhansh Group Pty Ltd, had initially applied to the Department for approval of a nominated position for the applicant, which was refused. The employer then applied to the Tribunal for a review of this refusal. The Tribunal, constituted by Member Mary Sheargold, considered whether the applicant met the requirement of having an approved nomination.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's nomination for the Subclass 187 visa was approved, as required by clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations. This clause outlines several conditions for an approved nomination, including that the nominating person is the employer, the nomination has been approved and not withdrawn, there is no adverse information known to the Department, the position remains available, and the visa application was made within six months of the nomination approval.

The Tribunal reasoned that on 8 May 2018, it had set aside the Department's decision to refuse the nomination and substituted a decision to approve the nomination under regulation 5.19(4). As the nomination had been approved by the Tribunal, the applicant satisfied the criterion in clause 187.233(3). Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria, with a direction that the applicant met clause 187.233(3).
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0