1506550 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for approval of a nomination under the Temporary Residence Transition stream, brought before the Tribunal by an applicant seeking to have a nomination approved. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's nomination application satisfied all the criteria set out in regulation 5.19(3)(a). Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess whether the nominated occupation, "Flower Grower" (ANZSCO code 121212), had the same 4-digit occupation unit group code as the occupation for which the Subclass 457 visa holder, Mr Maheshkumar Jayantilal Prajapati, was granted his visa, which was "Nursery Person" (ANZSCO code 362411).

The Tribunal reasoned that while the application met the requirements of regulation 5.19(3)(a)(i) and (ii), it failed to satisfy regulation 5.19(3)(a)(iii)(B). This was because the 4-digit occupation unit group code for "Flower Grower" (Unit Group 1212) was different from that of "Nursery Person" (Unit Group 3624). The Tribunal noted that the applicant's representative had suggested the wrong occupation was selected by mistake, but found this could not overcome the discrepancy, particularly as the provided position description referred to a supervisory role. As all subparagraphs within regulation 5.19(3)(a) are cumulative, the failure to meet one subparagraph meant the entire paragraph was not satisfied. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.