Catsbeauty Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Catsbeauty Pty Ltd against a decision to affirm the cancellation of its sponsorship approval. The dispute arose from allegations that Catsbeauty Pty Ltd, as an approved sponsor, had failed to satisfy several sponsorship obligations. These alleged failures included not keeping and providing verifiable records, not notifying immigration authorities of certain events, and the sponsored person no longer being employed in the nominated occupation. The case was heard by R. Skaros, a Senior Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Catsbeauty Pty Ltd had failed to satisfy its sponsorship obligations under the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning record-keeping, notification of events, and ensuring the sponsored person worked in the nominated occupation. Consequently, the Tribunal was required to determine if the circumstances prescribed under the regulations for taking action against a sponsor existed, and if so, what action, if any, should be taken under section 140M of the Act.

The Tribunal considered the evidence presented, including the approval of the nomination for Ms. Jin Young Kim as a Hairdresser in February 2017, with a guaranteed annual earning of $54,000, and the subsequent grant of her Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal found that Catsbeauty Pty Ltd had failed to satisfy its sponsorship obligations under regulations 2.82, 2.83, 2.84, and 2.86. In reaching its decision, the Tribunal applied the criteria set out in regulation 2.89(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which require consideration of factors such as the nature and severity of the failure, its impact on the sponsored person, whether the failure was intentional, the extent of cooperation with immigration authorities, and steps taken to rectify the situation.

Having considered all the relevant circumstances, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.