Japanese Gourmet Ken Pty Ltd (ATF) K&K Tanabe Family Trust (Migration)
Case
•
[2023] AATA 2175
•13 June 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Japanese Gourmet Ken Pty Ltd (ATF) K&K Tanabe Family Trust (Migration) [2023] AATA 2175
[2023] AATA 2175
13 June 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a nomination made by Japanese Gourmet Ken Pty Ltd (ATF) K&K Tanabe Family Trust for a cook position under the Short-term stream. The applicant sought to have a decision not to approve the nomination set aside.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination under section 140GB(2) of the Act and regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether the nomination complied with the prescribed process in regulation 2.73, whether there was any adverse information known to Immigration, whether the nominator was a standard business sponsor, whether any debts under section 140ZO had been paid, and whether the requirements relating to existing Subclass 457 or Subclass 482 visa holders and specified occupations were met. The Tribunal also considered the applicability of labour market testing requirements under section 140GBA.
The Tribunal found that the nomination was made in accordance with the prescribed process, including the use of the approved form, payment of the nomination training contribution charge, identification of the nominee, and inclusion of required certifications. It was satisfied that no adverse information was known to Immigration, that the applicant was a standard business sponsor, and that no debts under section 140ZO were outstanding. The Tribunal also found that the requirements concerning family members of the nominee and the specified occupation were met. Crucially, the Tribunal determined that the labour market testing requirements in section 140GBA were not applicable in this instance.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination under section 140GB(2) of the Act and regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether the nomination complied with the prescribed process in regulation 2.73, whether there was any adverse information known to Immigration, whether the nominator was a standard business sponsor, whether any debts under section 140ZO had been paid, and whether the requirements relating to existing Subclass 457 or Subclass 482 visa holders and specified occupations were met. The Tribunal also considered the applicability of labour market testing requirements under section 140GBA.
The Tribunal found that the nomination was made in accordance with the prescribed process, including the use of the approved form, payment of the nomination training contribution charge, identification of the nominee, and inclusion of required certifications. It was satisfied that no adverse information was known to Immigration, that the applicant was a standard business sponsor, and that no debts under section 140ZO were outstanding. The Tribunal also found that the requirements concerning family members of the nominee and the specified occupation were met. Crucially, the Tribunal determined that the labour market testing requirements in section 140GBA were not applicable in this instance.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision approving 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