Tran (Migration)

[2023] AATA 2085

Tran (Migration) [2023] AATA 2085 (9 May 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Hoang Cong Tran

Mrs Chau Ngoc Bich Tran

Master Bao Nam Tran

CASE NUMBER:  1929122

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/778726

MEMBER:Antonio Dronjic

DATE AND TIME OF

ORAL DECISION AND REASONS:         9 May 2023 at 11:58 am (Australian Eastern Standard time)

DATE OF WRITTEN RECORD:                4 July 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa – Subclass 187 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme – Direct Entry stream – no approved nomination – decision under review affirmed          

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 187.233

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 25 September 2019 to refuse to grant the visa applicants Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) Subclass 187 visas under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. At the hearing on 9 May 2023 the Tribunal made an oral decision and gave an oral statement of decision and reasons. The following is the written record of those reasons.

3. This review was constituted and conducted by Member Antonio Dronjic. At the time the Tribunal received the request for a written reduction of the reasons Member Dronjic was not within the jurisdiction. This written record of reasons has been prepared by Senior Member Michael Ison based on a transcript of the recording of the Tribunal hearing held on 9 May 2023.

   STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

4. The time is 11.58am.  Based on the evidence before it, the Tribunal finds that the appointment mentioned in Subclass 187.233 lodged by The Pearlers Rest Pty Ltd on the first named applicant’s behalf has not been approved at the time of the Tribunal’s decision.

5. As a result, the Tribunal finds that the first named applicant does not meet the requirements of clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) at the time of its decision.

6. The applicants have only sought to satisfy the criteria for Subclass 187 visas in the direct entry stream.  No claims have been made in respect of the other visa streams. As the requirements that must be met by a person seeking a visa in the direct entry stream have not been met by the first names applicant the decision under review must be affirmed in relation to the first named applicant.

7. The Tribunal must also affirm the decision not to grant the second and the third-named applicants Subclass 187 visas as they do not meet the secondary criteria of being members of the family unit of a person (the first named applicant) who holds a Subclass 187 visa.  There is no evidence before the Tribunal that either of the secondary applicants meet the primary visa criteria in their own right.

8. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicants Subclass 187 visas.

   DECISION

9. The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

   Antonio Dronjic
   Member