1688 Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by 1688 Pty Ltd (the applicant) against the decision to refuse its nomination. The applicant sought to nominate an occupation for a visa holder, but the Department had refused to approve the nomination. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination under section 140GB(2) of the Act, which included satisfying the requirements of regulation 2.72 and the relevant legislative instrument.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the nominated occupation, Café or Restaurant Manager, was applicable to the position in which the visa holder was to work, given the provisions of IMMI 17/060. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the position fell within the definition of a "limited service restaurant" as outlined in the legislative instrument, which would render the occupation inapplicable. The Tribunal also considered other applicable regulations, including those relating to sponsorship, the nominated occupation's alignment with the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO), and the terms and conditions of employment.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the definition of a "limited service restaurant" within IMMI 17/060. It found that the ordinary meaning of "limited" and "service" indicated a restricted scope of offerings. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's business, described as a "limited service café" and a "coffee shop," met the criteria for a limited service restaurant. Consequently, the inapplicability condition under Item 8 of the Instrument applied, meaning the nominated occupation was not applicable to the position. The Tribunal noted that if any one of the regulatory requirements is not met, it is not necessary to consider the remaining requirements.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.