iiSnap Pty Ltd (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning iiSnap Pty Ltd's nomination for a position under the Direct Entry stream. The dispute centred on whether the applicant, iiSnap Pty Ltd, met the requirements for approving the employer nomination, specifically regarding the need for the nominated employee and the nature of the role. The decision was made by Member Andrew George.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if iiSnap Pty Ltd satisfied all the criteria stipulated in regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of an employer nomination. This involved assessing whether the application was in the approved form, accompanied by the prescribed fee, and identified a genuine need for a paid employee under the nominator's direct control. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider if the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, if the terms and conditions of employment were no less favourable than those offered to Australian citizens or permanent residents, and if the tasks of the nominated position corresponded to an occupation specified by the Minister.

The Tribunal found that the application met the formal requirements, including being in the approved form and accompanied by the correct fee. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied, based on a statutory declaration and other evidence, that there was a demonstrated need for the nominated position, which was akin to a Chief Information Officer role and critical to the applicant company's operations. The Tribunal also considered the evidence regarding the nominator's active and lawful operation of a business, the terms and conditions of employment, the absence of adverse information, and compliance with workplace relations laws. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the tasks of the nominated position corresponded to those of an Information and Organisational Professional, a Skill Level 1 role, and that the proposed employee possessed the necessary qualifications and experience.

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