Cougar Cabinets Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Cougar Cabinets Pty Ltd (the applicant) against a decision to refuse the approval of a nomination for a visa. The applicant sought to nominate an individual for the occupation of Cabinetmaker under the medium-term stream. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nominated position was genuine and whether the applicant had provided sufficient information to satisfy the relevant criteria under the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by Terrence Baxter, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for the approval of the nomination, specifically focusing on regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This included determining if the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine, as required by regulation 2.72(10)(a). The Tribunal also considered the applicant's obligation to provide requested information within the prescribed period and the lack of current information regarding the nominee, the program, and the business.

The Tribunal reasoned that to approve the nomination, the applicant must be an approved work sponsor and satisfy the requirements of regulation 2.72, including that the nominated position is genuine and full-time. The Tribunal referred to *Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP* [2016] FCA 30 for the principle that a qualitative assessment of the position is required to determine its genuineness. While not bound by departmental policy, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to apply the policy's guidance on assessing genuineness, which involves demonstrating that a position exists requiring the duties of the nominated occupation. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had failed to provide further requested information within the prescribed period, leading to a lack of current information about the nominee, the program, and the business.

Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to approve the nomination.