Dimeo Cleaning Services (Aust) Pty Ltd ATF The DCS Trust (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by Dimeo Cleaning Services (Aust) Pty Ltd ATF The DCS Trust (the applicant) for approval of an employer nomination for the position of Cleaning Services Manager, classified under ANZSCO as Customer Service Manager. The applicant, a national cleaning company with extensive operations and a large workforce, sought approval for this nomination under the Direct Entry stream. The core dispute revolved around whether the nominated position and the applicant's circumstances met the specific requirements stipulated by the Migration Regulations 1994 for such nominations.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the criteria for approval of the nomination under Regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the application was made in the approved form, identified a genuine need for a paid employee under the nominator's direct control, and whether the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business. Crucially, the Tribunal also had to consider whether there was any adverse information known to the Department of Immigration about the nominator, or if such information could be reasonably disregarded, and whether the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with relevant laws.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that the application met the formal requirements of Regulation 5.19(4)(a), including being in the approved form and identifying a need for the nominated position. It also determined that the applicant was actively and lawfully operating its business, satisfying Regulation 5.19(4)(b). While acknowledging that the applicant had previously received an infringement notice and a temporary bar as a sponsor due to underpaying a sponsored employee, the Tribunal considered the circumstances surrounding this event. The applicant had disclosed this information, explaining it arose from a clerical error following an employee's shift reduction, and had paid the imposed penalty. The Tribunal concluded that it was reasonable to disregard this past adverse information, thereby satisfying Regulation 5.19(4)(f).

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision under review and substituted a decision approving the employer nomination.