Yash Pal (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visa, Subclass 186, under the Temporary Residence Transition stream, for the nominated position of Customer Service Manager. The applicant sought review of a decision by the Department of Home Affairs to refuse the nomination application. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had an approved nomination for the visa.

The central legal issue was whether the applicant satisfied clause 186.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which sets out the criteria for a nominated position in the Temporary Residence Transition stream. This clause requires, among other things, that the position be nominated in an application for approval, that the Minister has approved the nomination, that the nomination has not been withdrawn, that there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or associated persons (or such information is reasonable to disregard), that the position is still available to the applicant, and that the visa application was made within six months of the nomination approval.

The Tribunal noted that on 15 October 2020, it had affirmed a previous decision to refuse the nomination application by Virinder Singh Pty Ltd. As the applicant had not responded to communications from the Tribunal, and given the prior affirmation of the refusal of the nomination application, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the requirements of clause 186.223. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the second applicant, who was not a family member and did not appear to meet the primary criteria, failed to satisfy clause 186.311.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decisions not to grant the Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) visas to the applicants.