Andikonar (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa (Subclass 482) – Medium-term stream. The applicant, who had been working in Australia as a Chef, had ceased employment with his sponsoring employer due to a workplace dispute and had subsequently moved to Melbourne to take up employment with a new potential sponsor. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically concerning the genuineness of his intention to perform the nominated occupation and the genuineness of the nominated position.

The Tribunal considered whether the applicant's intention to perform the nominated occupation was genuine and whether the associated position was genuine, as required by sub-paragraph 482.212(2) of the regulations. The applicant conceded that he could no longer meet these criteria in relation to his original sponsor, having ceased employment and having no intention to return to that position due to an unresolved workplace dispute. The Tribunal found that, based on the available information, the applicant no longer had a genuine intention to perform the occupation related to the original sponsorship at the time of the decision. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the position associated with the original nomination was no longer genuine.

The Tribunal was not persuaded that any further adjournment of the proceedings was warranted to allow the applicant to secure a new nomination from his Melbourne-based employer. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Temporary Skill Shortage visa.