Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

The applicants, Jaspreet Singh, Amandeep Kaur, and Subreen Kaur, sought judicial review of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s (AAT) decision to affirm the delegate’s decision to refuse their application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) (Subclass 187) visa. The Tribunal’s decision was based on the finding that the first applicant was not the subject of an approved nomination, a requirement under cl 187.233 of the Regulations. The applicants raised four grounds of review, including claims that the AAT did not properly consider their evidence, they were misled by their migration agent, they were not aware they could not seek an extension of time, and they should have been given an opportunity to satisfy the AAT that they met the visa criteria.

The Court examined each ground of review. Regarding the first ground, the Court found that the Tribunal made the only decision open to it based on uncontradicted evidence that the first applicant did not have an approved nomination. The evidence regarding the first applicant’s past employment with the nominator, which the first applicant referred to, was not before the Tribunal and irrelevant to the issue of whether the first applicant was the subject of a valid nomination. The second ground of review, alleging fraud by the migration agent, was dismissed as there was insufficient evidence to support the claim. The third and fourth grounds were also dismissed as the Tribunal’s invitation to comment under s 359A of the Act complied with statutory requirements, and the Tribunal could not extend the time for the applicants to respond.

Ultimately, the Court found no jurisdictional error in the Tribunal’s decision and dismissed the application for judicial review. The Court noted that it could not review the merits of the Tribunal’s decision or grant the applicants the visas they sought. Instead, the Court’s role was restricted to determining if the Tribunal made a material error in arriving at the decision it arrived at. The Court found no such error and affirmed the Tribunal’s decision.

ORDER:
The Court orders that the application for judicial review be dismissed.