HAC HOAI ANH SALON BEAUTY & MASSAGE PTY LTD (Migration)
Case
•
[2023] AATA 916
•5 April 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
HAC HOAI ANH SALON BEAUTY & MASSAGE PTY LTD (Migration) [2023] AATA 916
[2023] AATA 916
5 April 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by HAC HOAI ANH SALON BEAUTY & MASSAGE PTY LTD for approval of a nomination for a visa. The applicant sought to nominate an individual for a position within its business. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), with Member Amanda Mendes Da Costa presiding, was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements for approval of the nomination under the Migration Regulations 1994.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the general requirements for nomination approval under regulation 5.19(4) and, specifically, the stream-specific requirements for the Direct Entry stream as set out in regulation 5.19(9). These requirements included, among others, that the nominated person would be employed full-time for at least two years, that the terms of employment would not exclude the possibility of extension, and crucially, that the nominator's business had the financial capacity to employ the nominated person for at least two years and pay them at least the annual market salary rate.
The Tribunal considered the financial information provided by the applicant, including taxation returns for the financial years ending 30 June 2020 and 30 June 2021. These returns indicated that the business had incurred losses in both financial years. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence demonstrating its financial capacity to employ the nominated person on a full-time basis for at least two years and to meet the required salary obligations. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of regulation 5.19.
Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the general requirements for nomination approval under regulation 5.19(4) and, specifically, the stream-specific requirements for the Direct Entry stream as set out in regulation 5.19(9). These requirements included, among others, that the nominated person would be employed full-time for at least two years, that the terms of employment would not exclude the possibility of extension, and crucially, that the nominator's business had the financial capacity to employ the nominated person for at least two years and pay them at least the annual market salary rate.
The Tribunal considered the financial information provided by the applicant, including taxation returns for the financial years ending 30 June 2020 and 30 June 2021. These returns indicated that the business had incurred losses in both financial years. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence demonstrating its financial capacity to employ the nominated person on a full-time basis for at least two years and to meet the required salary obligations. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of regulation 5.19.
Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2002] FCA 617
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li
[2013] HCA 18
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh
[2014] FCAFC 1