Yu (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 by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to refuse their visa application. The primary reason for the refusal was that the nomination lodged by the proposed employer, Milton Park Management P/L, was refused by a delegate of the Minister on 8 September 2017.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria under clause 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the nomination of a position for the Direct Entry stream. This clause requires, among other things, that the nominated position be approved and not subsequently withdrawn, that there be no adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, and that the visa application be made no more than six months after the nomination was approved. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria for the Temporary Residence Transition Stream and the Agreement stream, as well as secondary criteria.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had only sought to satisfy the criteria for the Direct Entry stream. As the nomination for this stream was refused by the Department, the applicant could not meet the requirements of clause 187.233. The Tribunal noted that while the applicant provided a response to the Department's request for comments on the nomination refusal, this response related to a change in migration agent and the withdrawal of a de facto partner from the visa application, not to the substantive reasons for the nomination refusal. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the other streams because the nomination was specifically made to meet the requirements of the Direct Entry stream, not those of the Temporary Residence Transition or Agreement streams. The secondary criteria were also not met.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa.