AINSBURY HOLDINGS PTY LTD (Migration)

This matter came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning a migration nomination dispute. The applicant, AINSBURY HOLDINGS PTY LTD, sought approval for a nomination under the Direct Entry stream of the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme for the occupation of Mechanical Engineering Draftsperson. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the various criteria stipulated in Regulation 5.19 of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of such a nomination.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied all the requirements of Regulation 5.19 for the approval of the nomination. Specifically, this involved assessing whether the application was compliant, whether there was a genuine need for the nominated employee, whether the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws, and whether the position met the criteria for occupations in regional Australia, including a genuine need for the position and its suitability for the nominee. The Tribunal also considered the financial capacity of the nominator to employ the nominee full-time for two years, although this specific point is not detailed in the provided text, the outcome suggests it was satisfied.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal systematically addressed each relevant subregulation of Regulation 5.19. It found that the application was made in the approved form, that the necessary certification regarding conduct contravening s.245AR(1) was provided, and that no fee was payable. The Tribunal also concluded that the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws and that there was no adverse information known to Immigration. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied that the position and the nominator's business were located in regional Australia, that there was a genuine need for the paid position under the nominator's direct control, and that the nominee had been employed in the role for over two years. The Tribunal accepted that the nominee, Mr Hamid Taheri, had been recruited in December 2016 and employed as a Mechanical Engineering Draftsperson for more than two years, thereby satisfying the genuine need requirement.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision under review and substituted a decision approving the nomination.