JM GOLDEN CARE PTY LTD (Migration)

This matter concerned a review by the Tribunal of a decision to refuse the nomination of an occupation by JM Golden Care Pty Ltd. The applicant sought to nominate a position as a Disability Support Officer.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically as stipulated in regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This regulation requires the nominator to be either a standard business sponsor or a party to a work agreement. The Tribunal was also required to consider whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy this criterion, given that departmental records indicated their standard business sponsorship had expired.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the onus placed on the applicant to prove they met all relevant criteria. Despite being invited to provide evidence that JM Golden Care Pty Ltd was a standard business sponsor or party to a work agreement, no such evidence was presented. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's standard business sponsorship had expired over a year prior to the hearing. Although the applicant requested an adjournment to address this, and subsequently sought further time to lodge a new sponsorship, the Tribunal declined, citing the significant expiry period, the applicant's ongoing representation by a migration agent, and the fact that a new sponsorship would require departmental determination, which was beyond the Tribunal's purview. The Tribunal applied regulation 2.72(4), which mandates that the nominator must be a standard business sponsor or a party to a work agreement.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination, finding that the applicant had not satisfied the applicable criteria.