INDSOFT PTY LTD (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by a delegate of the Minister to impose a 24-month sponsorship bar on INDSOFT PTY LTD. The bar was imposed because the delegate believed the duties performed by the sponsored employee, a Graphic Pre-press Trades Worker, extended beyond the scope of the nominated position, specifically concerning website and logo creation. This was considered adverse information that prevented the approval of a nominated position.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the duties performed by the sponsored employee were genuinely within the scope of a Graphic Pre-press Trades Worker, and whether the previously imposed sponsorship bar, though expired, should still preclude the approval of the nomination. The Tribunal also considered whether there was any adverse information that would prevent the approval of the nomination under regulation 5.19 of the Migration Regulations 1994, and whether the applicant had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws.

The Tribunal reasoned that the distinction between a Graphic Pre-press Trades Worker and a Graphic Designer could be a "grey area," with significant overlap in duties, particularly in the context of modern technological advancements in the graphics industry. It noted that a previous Tribunal decision concerning the nominee had found no significant or deliberate breach of visa conditions and had directed the reinstatement of the nominee's visa. The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided evidence of the nominated position's tasks, which included using computer applications for design and layout, and that the business's modernised processes involved computer-based software. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of regulation 5.19, including having no adverse information known to Immigration that could not be disregarded, and demonstrating a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws, including paying the nominee above the award rate.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted a decision approving the nomination.