Tan (Migration)
Case
•
[2022] AATA 2035
•23 June 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Tan (Migration) [2022] AATA 2035
[2022] AATA 2035
23 June 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought review of a decision to affirm the refusal of her visa application. The dispute arose after the Department of Home Affairs contacted the nominating business, Denny's Kitchen, which stated it was unaware of the nomination and had not authorised the lodgement of the application.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically concerning the availability of the nominated position. The Tribunal considered whether the nominated position was still available to the applicant as required by clause 187.233(5) of the Migration Regulations 1994.
The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the requirements of clause 187.233 could not be met. It noted that the applicant did not dispute that there was never a genuine position with Denny's Kitchen or EMC Group, and that the contract provided by the applicant was fraudulent. The Tribunal concluded that the nominated position was not available to the applicant, and as such, the criteria for the visa were not satisfied. The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically concerning the availability of the nominated position. The Tribunal considered whether the nominated position was still available to the applicant as required by clause 187.233(5) of the Migration Regulations 1994.
The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the requirements of clause 187.233 could not be met. It noted that the applicant did not dispute that there was never a genuine position with Denny's Kitchen or EMC Group, and that the contract provided by the applicant was fraudulent. The Tribunal concluded that the nominated position was not available to the applicant, and as such, the criteria for the visa were not satisfied. The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Natural Justice
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Tan (Migration) [2022] AATA 2035
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0