GEMRANCH PTY LTD (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by GEMRANCH PTY LTD against a decision to refuse the nomination of a training position for a Subclass 407 (Training) visa. The applicant sought to nominate Viet Tan Le for a 'Supply and Distribution Manager' position, proposing general, on-the-job training. The delegate refused the nomination on the basis that the proposed training did not meet the requirements of Regulation 2.72B(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically that it was not a structured training plan tailored to the nominee's needs and of appropriate duration. The Tribunal, presided over by Member Karen Synon, was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for approval of the nomination under the relevant regulations.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the nominated occupational training program met the requirements of Regulation 2.72B(3), which mandates that the training must be a structured workplace training program, specifically tailored to the nominee's needs, and of a duration that meets those needs. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy these criteria, particularly in light of the absence of a formal training plan and the applicant's failure to respond to a request for further information.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the nomination. It noted that the only supporting documentation provided with the application was the nominee's educational qualifications, passport, and IELTS results, with a statement that the training program was "still in the process of being finalised." Crucially, no structured training program was ever provided to the department or the Tribunal. Furthermore, the applicant failed to respond to the Tribunal's letter inviting the provision of information demonstrating compliance with Regulations 2.72A and 2.72B(3). As a result, the Tribunal could not be satisfied that the proposed training met the regulatory requirements for a structured, tailored, and appropriately timed program. The Tribunal therefore concluded that the applicant had not met the applicable criteria for the nomination to be approved.