Walia (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, specifically the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria set out in clauses 186.223(2) and 186.223(3) of the relevant regulations.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the requirements of clause 186.223, which pertains to the nomination of a position for the visa. This clause, as applicable, stipulated that the nominated position must be the subject of an approved nomination that identifies the visa applicant, and that the nomination must not have been withdrawn. Furthermore, it required that there be no adverse information known to Immigration concerning the nominator or associated persons, or that any such information be reasonably disregarded. The position also needed to remain available to the applicant, and the visa application had to be made within six months of the nomination's approval. The Tribunal also considered whether the secondary applicants met clause 186.311, which requires them to be members of the family unit of a person who satisfies the primary criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. It found that the nominator had failed to satisfy regulation 5.19(3). The Tribunal noted that the employer nomination review had been affirmed, and that a requirement for visa grant is an approved nomination for the specified position. The Tribunal also advised that the secondary applicants did not meet clause 186.311. The applicant indicated they understood the employer nomination decision had been affirmed and did not wish to withdraw their review application.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas, finding that the secondary applicants did not meet clause 186.311.