Vartiya (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187, under the Direct Entry stream. The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the primary applicant was the subject of an approved nomination for the position of Retail Manager.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of clause 187.233 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates, among other things, that the position be the subject of an approved nomination in regional Australia, that the nominator be the prospective employer, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, and that the visa application is made within six months of the nomination's approval. The Tribunal also considered whether there was any adverse information concerning the nominator or associated persons.

The Tribunal found that departmental records indicated the applicant's sponsor, Shree Ghanashyam Pty Ltd, had been refused a nomination on 29 June 2019. The applicant, during the hearing, admitted that his employer was untruthful, had closed the business, and had repeatedly asked for money while never providing a job. The applicant acknowledged that he was no longer the subject of an approved nomination and that he had been working for Dominoes as a store manager for the past six years. Based on the absence of evidence of an approved nomination and the applicant's admissions, the Tribunal concluded that clause 187.233 had not been met.

Consequently, as the primary applicant failed to meet the criteria for the visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visas to both the primary and secondary applicants.