1501829 (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal before the Tribunal regarding a visa application. The primary dispute centred on whether the applicant genuinely intended to perform the nominated occupation and whether the position associated with that occupation was also genuine, as required by cl.457.223(4)(d).

The Tribunal was required to determine if the primary visa applicant met the requirements of cl.457.223(4)(d) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically concerning the genuineness of her intention to perform the nominated occupation and the genuineness of the associated position. This involved assessing the applicant's qualifications and the operational needs of the family business.

The Tribunal found that the primary applicant, a highly qualified woman with extensive experience in contract administration and bookkeeping, possessed the necessary academic and practical skills to perform the role of Contract Administrator. It was noted that this role was essential for the family business, particularly given the secondary applicant's focus on hands-on work and his limited proficiency in English for administrative tasks. The Tribunal rejected the delegate's finding that the position was created solely to secure the applicant's stay, concluding instead that the couple's combined talents were instrumental to the business's success.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the applications for reconsideration by the Minister, directing that the first named applicant meets the criterion under cl.457.223(4)(d) and the second named applicant meets the criterion under cl.457.324(1). The Tribunal clarified that it did not have jurisdiction regarding Mr Jose Luis Rivera Bayer.