GOODFARMERS PTY LTD (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Goodfarmers Pty Ltd against a decision to bar it from making applications for approval as a standard business sponsor for five years. The dispute arose from the company's failure to provide a substantive response to a letter issued by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal under section 359 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The underlying issue involved the underpayment of wages to a subclass 457 visa holder, which was rectified only after the Department of Home Affairs commenced monitoring. The company also supplied records to the Department late and incompletely.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether a relevant circumstance existed under section 140L(1)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) that necessitated taking action under section 140M. In making this determination, the Tribunal had to consider prescribed criteria, including the sponsor's past and present conduct in relation to immigration, the number of occasions on which the sponsor failed to satisfy sponsorship obligations, and the nature and severity of those failures, including the duration of the failures. The period for which the person had been an approved sponsor was also a relevant consideration.

The Tribunal found that Goodfarmers Pty Ltd had breached its obligation to ensure equivalent terms and conditions of employment, as well as its obligation to provide records and information to the Minister. While the company eventually rectified the underpayment of wages, this occurred almost 12 months after the first unpaid week and several months after the Department's initial request for information. The underpayments were found to have occurred regularly throughout 2015. Furthermore, the required payslips and bank statements were only provided over a year after the Department's request. The Tribunal concluded that these breaches were ongoing until the Department commenced monitoring and were serious in nature.

The Tribunal was satisfied that a relevant circumstance existed under section 140L(1)(a) and, having regard to the prescribed criteria, determined that the action to be taken under section 140M was to bar the sponsor from making applications for approval as a standard business sponsor for five years.