Tang (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, Direct Entry stream, by Mr. Tang, with his partner Ms. Zhu as the second applicant. The dispute arose because the Department of Immigration refused to grant the visa, a decision that was under review by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr. Tang met the criteria for the Subclass 187 visa, specifically clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause requires, among other things, that the position to which the application relates must have been the subject of an approved nomination in the Direct Entry stream, located in regional Australia. The Tribunal also considered whether Ms. Zhu, as a secondary applicant, met the criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal reasoned that a crucial requirement of clause 187.233 was that the nomination for the position of Office Manager must have been approved. The evidence before the Tribunal indicated that the nomination application made by Ms. Westlake was refused by the Department on 29 August 2018, and no review of this refusal was sought. As the nomination had not been approved, Mr. Tang failed to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa. Consequently, Ms. Zhu, as a secondary applicant, also could not satisfy the criteria, as there was no evidence she met the primary requirements independently.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants their Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas.