Jerome Mobile Engineers Pty Ltd (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by Jerome Mobile Engineers Pty Ltd for approval of a nomination for a Subclass 186 (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa under the Direct Entry stream. The dispute arose because the Department of Home Affairs had refused the nomination application based on previous administrative action to cancel the company's sponsorship and impose a five-year bar on sponsoring further employees. This bar was due to alleged breaches of sponsorship obligations.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the nominator, Jerome Mobile Engineers Pty Ltd, met the requirements for approval of the nomination under regulation 5.19 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if there was any adverse information known to Immigration about the nominator or an associated person that could not be disregarded, and if the nominator had a genuine need for the identified employee to work in the nominated position under their direct control, on terms and conditions no less favourable than those for Australian workers.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the impact of a prior AAT decision (Case number: 2006546) which had set aside the cancellation of the company's sponsorship and the associated sponsorship bar. The Tribunal found that the adverse information that formed the sole basis for the refusal of the current nomination application had been found not to exist in the previous review. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the requirement under regulation 5.19(4)(b) was met, as there was no adverse information known to Immigration, or any such information was reasonable to disregard. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the tasks of the nominated Motor Mechanic (General) occupation corresponded to the specified occupation and that there was a genuine need for the employee to be employed under the nominator's direct control on appropriate terms and conditions.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision approving the nomination.