THE TRUSTEE FOR XHIHANI FAMILY TRUST (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 2817
•19 June 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
THE TRUSTEE FOR XHIHANI FAMILY TRUST (Migration) [2018] AATA 2817
[2018] AATA 2817
19 June 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a review of a decision to refuse a nomination under the Direct Entry nomination stream. The applicant was The Trustee for Xhihani Family Trust. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had met the requirements for the nomination, specifically concerning certification from a regional certifying body.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994, particularly subregulation (h)(ii)(F), which mandates that a regional certifying body located in the same State or Territory as the position must have advised the Minister on certain matters. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had provided evidence of this certification when requested.
The Tribunal reasoned that for a nomination under the Direct Entry stream, specifically where the position is located in regional Australia, the applicant must demonstrate that a relevant regional certifying body has provided the required advice. The Tribunal noted that there was no evidence on the Department's file, nor was any provided by the applicant when requested, to show that the necessary certification from a regional certifying body had been obtained. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii)(F) were not met, and therefore, the nomination could not be approved.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994, particularly subregulation (h)(ii)(F), which mandates that a regional certifying body located in the same State or Territory as the position must have advised the Minister on certain matters. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had provided evidence of this certification when requested.
The Tribunal reasoned that for a nomination under the Direct Entry stream, specifically where the position is located in regional Australia, the applicant must demonstrate that a relevant regional certifying body has provided the required advice. The Tribunal noted that there was no evidence on the Department's file, nor was any provided by the applicant when requested, to show that the necessary certification from a regional certifying body had been obtained. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii)(F) were not met, and therefore, the nomination could not be approved.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Natural Justice
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0