Jackward Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Jackward Pty Ltd for approval of a nomination for a position. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically whether the nominated position was genuine, as stipulated by regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to consider whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for approval of the nomination under section 140GB(2) of the Migration Act 1958 and regulation 2.72. Crucially, the applicant had been invited to provide current information about its business and the nominated position by a specified date, with a warning that failure to respond or seek an extension would result in the loss of entitlement to appear before the Tribunal. The applicant failed to respond within the prescribed period and did not request an extension.

The Tribunal reasoned that, in accordance with sections 359C and 360(3) of the Migration Act, the applicant was not entitled to appear before it. Citing *Hasran v MIAC* [2010] FCAFC 40, the Tribunal noted that it had no power to permit an appearance if there was no entitlement to a hearing. As no information had been provided by the applicant to support its application, and lacking current evidence regarding the business or its employees, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine, thus failing to meet the requirements of regulation 2.72(10)(f). Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.