Wang (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 5274
•18 November 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Wang (Migration) [2019] AATA 5274
[2019] AATA 5274
18 November 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, specifically under the Temporary Residence Transition stream of the Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa. The applicant, identified as Wang, sought review of a decision concerning their eligibility. The dispute centred on whether the employer's nomination for the applicant's position as a Cable Design Technical Engineer, classified as a Building and Engineering Technician, had been approved. The decision was made by Jane Bell, a Member of the Tribunal.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant met the requirements of clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination that identifies the visa applicant, and that the nomination must have been approved, not withdrawn, and meet specific criteria regarding adverse information and the availability of the position. Additionally, the visa application must have been lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal found that while it was not disputed that the applicant's employer, OJAS Group Pty Ltd, did not have an approved nomination at the time of the delegate's initial decision, the Tribunal had previously set aside a refusal of the nomination and substituted a decision to approve it on 18 November 2019. Based on this, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nomination had now been approved and not withdrawn, that no adverse information was known or could be disregarded, that the position remained available, and that the visa application was made within the requisite six-month period following the nomination's approval. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 186.223 was met.
The Tribunal remitted the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant met the requirements of clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that the position to which the visa application relates must be the subject of an approved nomination that identifies the visa applicant, and that the nomination must have been approved, not withdrawn, and meet specific criteria regarding adverse information and the availability of the position. Additionally, the visa application must have been lodged within six months of the nomination's approval.
The Tribunal found that while it was not disputed that the applicant's employer, OJAS Group Pty Ltd, did not have an approved nomination at the time of the delegate's initial decision, the Tribunal had previously set aside a refusal of the nomination and substituted a decision to approve it on 18 November 2019. Based on this, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nomination had now been approved and not withdrawn, that no adverse information was known or could be disregarded, that the position remained available, and that the visa application was made within the requisite six-month period following the nomination's approval. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 186.223 was met.
The Tribunal remitted the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in clause 186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Wang (Migration) [2019] AATA 5274
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0