Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
[2022] FedCFamC2G 245
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FedCFamC2G 245
File number(s): SYG 704 of 2020 Judgment of: JUDGE EGAN Date of judgment: 14 April 2022 Catchwords: MIGRATION – Failure by first applicant to establish that there was an approved employer nomination in place in respect of the first applicant – failure to establish an entitlement to the grant of a visa – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. Legislation: Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth): Cl 186.213(3) and 186.223(2) Division: Division 2 General Federal Law Number of paragraphs: 9 Date of last submission/s: 5 April 2022 Date of hearing: 5 April 2022 Place: Brisbane Applicant: Mr Singh as a self-represented litigant Solicitor for the First Respondent Mills Oakley Second Respondent: Submitting Appearance save as to costs ORDERS
SYG 704 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: ANGREJ SINGH
First Applicant
HARVINDER KAUR
Second Applicant
JASMINE KAUR HANJRA
Third Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, MIGRANT SERVICES AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE EGAN
DATE OF ORDER:
14 APRIL 2022
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Originating Application for Review filed on 20 March 2020 is dismissed.
2.The First Applicant and the Second Applicant pay the First Respondent’s costs of and incidental to the Originating Application for Review, fixed in the amount $6,100.00.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judge Egan
Introduction
The first applicant is a citizen of the Republic of India who applied for a Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) Visa on 17 August 2015. The second and third applicants applied for visas as members of the first applicant’s family unit.
A delegate of the Minister refused to grant the first applicant the visa on the basis that he did not satisfy the criteria as set out in clause 186.213(3) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (‘the Regulations’).
On 12 March 2020, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) affirmed the decision of the delegate not to grant the visa. The Tribunal found that the first applicant had failed to meet the relevant criteria under clause 186.223(2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and that, therefore, a necessary pre-condition to the grant of the visa to the first applicant had not been satisfied.
At [35] of its reasons, the Tribunal recorded that the employer nomination application made by Magic Coin Pty Ltd ATF Tibor Vertes Family Trust in respect of the applicant’s nominated position had been refused.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the delegate, albeit on a different ground, because there was no evidence before it that the necessary pre-condition for the grant of the visa had been satisfied.
The failure on the part of the first applicant to satisfy the relevant criteria was fatal to the grant of the visa applications in respect of all applicants, as none of them had satisfied such criteria.
The applicants have failed to establish jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal.
The Originating Application for Review is without merit and is dismissed.
The Court will hear the parties as to costs.
I certify that the preceding nine (9) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Egan. Associate:
Dated: 14 April 2022
0
0
0