CMSN GROUP PTY LTD (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 1899
•5 April 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
CMSN GROUP PTY LTD (Migration) [2018] AATA 1899
[2018] AATA 1899
5 April 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Cth) considered an appeal by CMSN GROUP PTY LTD concerning the refusal of a nomination for a Subclass 457 visa. The nominated occupation was Web Developer (ANZSCO 261212). The core of the dispute was whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the nominated position was genuine, as required by migration regulations.
The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically whether the nominated position was genuine, as stipulated by regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 2.72 and section 140GBA of the Migration Act 1958.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had failed to provide current information to demonstrate the genuineness of the Web Developer position, despite being invited to do so. The delegate's decision record indicated a lack of documentation supporting the nomination or proving the position's genuineness. As no further information or evidence was provided to the Tribunal, it was not satisfied that the position was genuine, and therefore, the requirements of regulation 2.72(10)(f) were not met. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination.
The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically whether the nominated position was genuine, as stipulated by regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 2.72 and section 140GBA of the Migration Act 1958.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had failed to provide current information to demonstrate the genuineness of the Web Developer position, despite being invited to do so. The delegate's decision record indicated a lack of documentation supporting the nomination or proving the position's genuineness. As no further information or evidence was provided to the Tribunal, it was not satisfied that the position was genuine, and therefore, the requirements of regulation 2.72(10)(f) were not met. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0