H DU & H.Q WU (Migration) - [2022] AATA 3037

H DU & H.Q WU (Migration) [2022] AATA 3037 (18 August 2022)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  H DU & H.Q WU
CASE NUMBER:  1916310
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2017/4619098
MEMBER:Karen McNamara
DATE:18 August 2022
PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision under review to refuse the nomination.

Statement made on 18 August 2022 at 1:25pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – nomination – Direct Entry nomination stream – Cook – applicant failed to provide the requested information within the prescribed period – applicant has failed to identify a need for the nominator to employ the nominee –decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 245AR, 359, 360, 363
Migration Regulations 1994, r 5.19
CASES
Hasran v MIAC [2010] FCAFC 40
Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 617
Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 915
Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FMCA 28
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li [2013] HCA 18
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh [2014] FCAFC 1
Yang v MIAC [2010] FMCA 890
STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 1 June 2019 to reject the application by H DU & H.Q WU (the applicant) for approval of the nomination of a position in Australia under reg 5.19 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations).
The applicant applied for approval on 5 December 2017. The requirements for the approval of the nomination of a position in Australia are found in reg 5.19 of the Regulations which contains two alternative streams: a Temporary Residence Transition nomination stream (reg 5.19(3)) and a Direct Entry nomination stream (reg 5.19(4)). If the application is made in accordance with reg 5.19(2) and meets the requirements of either stream, then the application must be approved. If any of the requirements are not met then the application must be refused: reg 5.19(5).
In this case, the applicant has applied for approval of a nomination, seeking to satisfy the criteria in the Direct Entry nomination stream.
The delegate refused the application because the applicant did not meet r.5.19(4)(h)(ii) (B). The delegate found that the application for approval did not demonstrate a genuine need for the nominator to employ the nominee, as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control. Since r.5.19(4)(h)(ii) (B) was not met, the applicant subsequently did not meet r.5.19(4)(h).
The applicant lodged an application for review with the Tribunal on 21 June 2019. The review application was accompanied by a copy of the delegate’s decision. No additional information was provided. The Tribunal also has before it the Department file containing all information before the delegate at the time of their decision.
On 26 July 2022, the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant pursuant to s.359(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act), inviting the review…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading H DU & H.Q WU (Migration)

Details

AGLC: H DU & H.Q WU (Migration) [2022] AATA 3037
Case: [2022] AATA 3037
Decision Date: 18 August 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for approval of a nomination for the occupation of Cook under the Direct Entry nomination stream, brought before the Tribunal by the applicants H DU and H.Q WU. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicants had satisfied the requirements of regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the genuine need for the nominator to employ the proposed nominee.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicants met the criteria outlined in regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This regulation sets out alternative requirements for a nomination to be approved, including conditions related to the location of the position and business, a genuine need for the nominee to be employed as a paid employee under the nominator's direct control, the inability to fill the position with a local resident, and correspondence of the position's tasks to a specified occupation. The Tribunal specifically considered whether the applicants had demonstrated a genuine need for the nominator to employ the nominee as a paid employee in the nominated position under their direct control.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicants claimed to meet the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii), which necessitates a genuine need for the nominator to employ the nominee. The delegate had previously refused the application on the grounds that this genuine need was not demonstrated. The Tribunal had invited the applicants to provide further information regarding this genuine need, but no response was received. Consequently, the Tribunal was unable to be satisfied that the applicants had established a genuine need for the nominator to employ the nominee as a paid employee under their direct control, a key requirement of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii)(B).

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination, as the applicants had failed to satisfy the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii).

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided to affirm the decision under review to refuse the nomination.CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE The issue in this case is whether the applicant meets the requirements for approval of the nomination under the Direct Entry nomination stream set out in reg 5.19(4), which is extracted in the attachment to this decision. For the nomination to be approved, all the requirements must be met.Tasks of the position, genuine need for the position and training requirements reg 5.19(4)(h) Regulation 5.19(4)(h) contains a number of alternative requirements. These are set out in detail in the attachment to the decision but can be briefly summarised as requiring either that:·the tasks to be performed in the position will be performed in Australia and correspond to those of an occupation specified by the Minister in the relevant instrument, the occupation is applicable to the proposed employee in accordance with any specifications made in that instrument, and specified training requirements are met; or·the position and nominator’s business is located in regional Australia, there is a genuine need for the nominee to be employed as a paid employee in the position under the nominator’s direct control, the position cannot be filled by a locally resident Australian citizen or permanent resident, the tasks of the position correspond to those of an occupation specified in the relevant legislative instrument, the occupation is applicable to the proposed employee in accordance with the specification of the occupation, and that a regional certifying body has advised the Minister about certain matters relating to the position. In this case, the applicant claims to meet the requirements in r.5.19(4)(h)(ii). The review applicant nominated the position/occupation of Cook (ANZSCO 351411). On 1 June 2019, the delegate refused the application because the applicant did not meet r.5.19(4)(h)(ii) (B) because the application for approval did not demonstrate a genuine need for the nominator to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control. On 26 July 2022, the Tribunal invited the applicant to provide information including the genuine need to employ the nominee as a paid employee to work in the nominated position under the applicant’s direct control. As noted above, no response has been received to the Tribunal’s invitation to provide information. The applicant has not provided current information about the genuine need to employ the nominee to work in the nominated position. As such the Tribunal is unable to be satisfied at the time of this decision that the applicant (the nominator) demonstrated there is a genuine need to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that r.5.19(4)(h)(ii) (B) is met and therefore the applicant does not satisfy the requirements r.5.19(4)(h)(ii).

Decision

Reasons for decision

For the above reasons the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant meets the requirements of reg 5.19(4). The applicant has not sought to satisfy the criteria in Temporary Residence Transition Nomination stream, and as such has not met the requirements in reg 5.19(3). Accordingly, the nomination of the position cannot be approved. Therefore, the Tribunal must affirm the decision under review.DECISION The Tribunal affirms the decision under review to refuse the nomination.Karen McNamaraMemberATTACHMENT - Extracts from the Migration Regulations 19945.19Approval of nominated positions (employer nomination)…(2)The application must:(a)be made in accordance with approved form 1395…; and(aa) include a written certification by the nominator stating whether or not the nominator has engaged in conduct, in relation to the nomination, that constitutes a contravention of subsection 245AR(1) of the Act; and(b)be accompanied by the fee mentioned in regulation 5.37.…Direct Entry nomination(4)The Minister must, in writing, approve a nomination if:(a)the application for approval:(i) is made in accordance with subregulation (2); and(ii) identifies a need for the nominator to employ an identified person, as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control; and(b)the nominator:(i) is actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia; and(ii) directly operates the business; and(c)for a nominator whose business activities include activities relating to the hiring of labour to other unrelated businesses — the position is within the business activities of the nominator and not for hire to other unrelated businesses; and(d)both of the following apply:(i) the employee will be employed on a full-time basis in the position for at least 2 years;(ii) the terms and conditions of the employee’s employment will not include an express exclusion of the possibility of extending the period of employment; and(e)the terms and conditions of employment applicable to the position will be no less favourable than the terms and conditions that:(i) are provided; or(ii) would be provided;to an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident for performing equivalent work in the same workplace at the same location; and(f)either:(i) there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or a person associated with the nominator; or(ii) it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or a person associated with the nominator; and(g)the nominator has a satisfactory record of compliance with the laws of the Commonwealth, and of each State or Territory in which the applicant operates a business and employs employees in the business, relating to workplace relations; and(h)either:(i) all of the following apply:(A)the tasks to be performed in the position will be performed in Australia and correspond to the tasks of an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph;(AA)there is a genuine need for the nominator to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control;(AAA)the occupation is applicable to the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii) in accordance with the specification of the occupation;(B)either:(I)the nominator’s business has operated for at least 12 months, and the nominator meets the requirements for the training of Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents that are specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-sub-subparagraph; or(II)the nominator’s business has operated for less than 12 months, and the nominator has an auditable plan for meeting the requirements specified in the instrument mentioned in sub-sub-subparagraph (I); or(ii) all of the following apply:(A)the position is located in regional Australia;(B)there is a genuine need for the nominator to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control;(C)the position cannot be filled by an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident who is living in the same local area as that place;(D)the tasks to be performed in the position correspond to the tasks of an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph;(DA)the occupation is applicable to the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii) in accordance with the specification of the occupation;(E)the business operated by the nominator is located at that place;(F)a body that is:(I)specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph; and(II)located in the same State or Territory as the location of the position;has advised the Minister about the matters mentioned in paragraph (e) and sub-subparagraphs (B) and (C).

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

The Tribunal affirms the decision under review to refuse the nomination.Karen McNamaraMemberATTACHMENT - Extracts from the Migration Regulations 19945.19Approval of nominated positions (employer nomination)…(2)The application must:(a)be made in accordance with approved form 1395…; and(aa) include a written certification by the nominator stating whether or not the nominator has engaged in conduct, in relation to the nomination, that constitutes a contravention of subsection 245AR(1) of the Act; and(b)be accompanied by the fee mentioned in regulation 5.37.…Direct Entry nomination(4)The Minister must, in writing, approve a nomination if:(a)the application for approval:(i) is made in accordance with subregulation (2); and(ii) identifies a need for the nominator to employ an identified person, as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control; and(b)the nominator:(i) is actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia; and(ii) directly operates the business; and(c)for a nominator whose business activities include activities relating to the hiring of labour to other unrelated businesses — the position is within the business activities of the nominator and not for hire to other unrelated businesses; and(d)both of the following apply:(i) the employee will be employed on a full-time basis in the position for at least 2 years;(ii) the terms and conditions of the employee’s employment will not include an express exclusion of the possibility of extending the period of employment; and(e)the terms and conditions of employment applicable to the position will be no less favourable than the terms and conditions that:(i) are provided; or(ii) would be provided;to an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident for performing equivalent work in the same workplace at the same location; and(f)either:(i) there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or a person associated with the nominator; or(ii) it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or a person associated with the nominator; and(g)the nominator has a satisfactory record of compliance with the laws of the Commonwealth, and of each State or Territory in which the applicant operates a business and employs employees in the business, relating to workplace relations; and(h)either:(i) all of the following apply:(A)the tasks to be performed in the position will be performed in Australia and correspond to the tasks of an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph;(AA)there is a genuine need for the nominator to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control;(AAA)the occupation is applicable to the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii) in accordance with the specification of the occupation;(B)either:(I)the nominator’s business has operated for at least 12 months, and the nominator meets the requirements for the training of Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents that are specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-sub-subparagraph; or(II)the nominator’s business has operated for less than 12 months, and the nominator has an auditable plan for meeting the requirements specified in the instrument mentioned in sub-sub-subparagraph (I); or(ii) all of the following apply:(A)the position is located in regional Australia;(B)there is a genuine need for the nominator to employ the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii), as a paid employee, to work in the position under the nominator’s direct control;(C)the position cannot be filled by an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident who is living in the same local area as that place;(D)the tasks to be performed in the position correspond to the tasks of an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph;(DA)the occupation is applicable to the person identified under subparagraph (a)(ii) in accordance with the specification of the occupation;(E)the business operated by the nominator is located at that place;(F)a body that is:(I)specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph; and(II)located in the same State or Territory as the location of the position;has advised the Minister about the matters mentioned in paragraph (e) and sub-subparagraphs (B) and (C).