Yang (Migration)

[2019] AATA 943

Yang (Migration) [2019] AATA 943 (16 April 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Darui Yang

CASE NUMBER:  1722201

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):           BCC2016/4012032

MEMBER:John Cipolla

DATE:16 April 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

·cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

Statement made on 16 April 2019 at 3:55pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) Visa – Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) – Temporary Residence Transition stream – position of Web Developer – subject of an approved nomination – nomination approved upon review – decision under review remitted  

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2 cl 186.223; r 1.13

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection on 31 August 2017 to refuse to grant the applicant an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 28 November 2016. At the time of application, Class EN contained one subclass: Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme).

3. The criteria for the grant of a Subclass 186 visa are set out in Part 186 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria. Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria must meet the ‘Common criteria’, as well as the criteria of one of three alternative visa streams: the Temporary Residence Transition stream, the Direct Entry stream, or the Labour Agreement stream.

4. In the present case, the applicant is seeking the visa in Temporary Residence Transition stream, to work in the nominated position of Web Developer.

5. The delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not meet cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the position to which the application relates was not the subject of an approved nomination.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. The issue in the present case is whether the position to which the application relates is the subject of an approved nomination.

   Nomination of a position

8. Clause 186.223 as applicable in this case is set out in full in the attachment to this decision. Essentially, it requires that the position to which the application relates is the subject of an application for approval of a nomination in the Temporary Residence Transition stream that identifies the visa applicant. The position must be the one that was the subject of the declaration that was required to be made as part of the current visa application.

9. In addition, this criterion also requires that:

   ·the nomination has been approved and has not been subsequently withdrawn

   ·there is no ‘adverse information’ known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person ‘associated with’ that person (within the meaning of r.1.13A and r.1.13B); or it is reasonable to disregard any such information

   ·the position is still available to the applicant, and

   ·the visa application was made no more than six months after the nomination of the position was approved.

10. The nomination application lodged by Australian Ideal College Pty Ltd on 22 November 2016 under the Employer Nomination Scheme was refused by the Department on 25 July 2017.

11. The Tribunal on 15 April 2019 in a review of the nomination refusal has subsequently approved the nomination by Australian Ideal College Pty Ltd. The Tribunal thus finds that the position to which the application relates is the subject of an approved nomination and meets the requirements of cl.186.223 of the Migration Regulations.

12. The Tribunal accordingly finds that the requirements of r.186.223 are satisfied.

13. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

14. The Tribunal remits the application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa:

    ·cl.186.223 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    John Cipolla
    Senior Member

    
    

    ATTACHMENT A

    186.223(1)      The position to which the application relates is the position:

    (a)nominated in an application for approval that seeks to meet the requirements of subregulation 5.19(3); and

    (b)in relation to which the applicant is identified as the holder of a Subclass 457 … visa; and

    (c)in relation to which the declaration mentioned in paragraph 1114B(3)(d) of Schedule 1 was made in the application for the grant of the visa.

    (2)      The Minister has approved the nomination.

    (3)      The nomination has not subsequently been withdrawn.

    (3A)    Either:

    (a)there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person; or

    (b)it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the nomination or a person associated with that person.

    (4)      The position is still available to the applicant.

    (5)      The application for the visa is made no more than 6 months after the Minister approved the nomination.