AUSCO INVESTMENT GROUP PTY.LTD. (Migration)

This matter came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning a nomination made by Ausco Investment Group Pty. Ltd. under the Direct Entry nomination stream. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant had met the training benchmark requirement stipulated by regulation 5.19(4)(h)(B)(I) of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal was tasked with reviewing the decision to refuse the nomination.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant satisfied the requirements of regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the training benchmark. This involved determining if the applicant's business had operated for at least 12 months and if it had met the specified training expenditure requirements, either through payments to an industry training fund (Training Benchmark A) or through the provision of training to its employees (Training Benchmark B).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's business had been operating for at least 12 months, thus triggering the consideration of the training expenditure benchmarks. However, no evidence was provided to substantiate claims for Training Benchmark A, nor was such expenditure claimed. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Training Benchmark A had been met. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant had not sought to satisfy the criteria under the Temporary Residence Transition Nomination stream.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination, concluding that the applicant had not met the requirements of regulation 5.19(4).