Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa, Subclass 187, under the Direct Entry stream. The applicant, Mr. Singh, sought to satisfy the criteria for this visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had demonstrated that the position specified in his visa application was the subject of an approved nomination. Clause 187.233 requires, among other things, that the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn. The Tribunal noted that the employer, Dine On Us Pty Ltd, had withdrawn its application for review of the refusal of its nomination for the position of Cook in relation to the applicant.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant could not satisfy clause 187.233 because there was no approved nomination for the position. The Tribunal relied on the Full Court of the Federal Court's decision in *Singh v MIBP* [2017] FCAFC 105, which emphasised that the visa application is considered against a specific employer nomination and a specific approval of that nomination. The Tribunal found that the withdrawal of the employer's review application meant there was no pending review that could lead to an approved nomination. Consequently, as the applicant had not met the essential criteria for the Direct Entry stream of the Subclass 187 visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.