Sohi (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Tribunal regarding the refusal of an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Subclass 186 Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant sought this visa as a Motor Mechanic, with a nomination application previously approved by the Department. The core dispute revolved around whether the nominated position remained available to the applicant at the time of the visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met all the criteria for a Subclass 186 visa, with a particular focus on clause 186.223(4), which mandates that the nominated position must still be available to the applicant. This involved assessing the evidence presented by the applicant concerning his ongoing employment and the status of his employer.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the visa, finding that the applicant had not satisfied the requirement that the nominated position remained available. While the nomination itself had been approved and not withdrawn, the Tribunal gave significant weight to evidence indicating the applicant's employer was subject to winding-up action and that the applicant's former boss was seriously ill and no longer involved in the business. This evidence, coupled with the applicant's inability to provide employment documentation for recent financial years, led the Tribunal to conclude that the nominated position was no longer available. The Tribunal also noted that the secondary applicants, family members, did not meet the criteria for the visa.