K&P Sodhi Pty Ltd (Migration)

K&P Sodhi Pty Ltd (Migration) [2020] AATA 3885 (25 September 2020)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  K&P Sodhi Pty Ltd
CASE NUMBER:  1725103
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2016/4062049
MEMBER:R. Skaros
DATE:25 September 2020
PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to approve the nomination.

Statement made on 25 September 2020 at 1:36pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – nomination of position – no response to tribunal’s invitation to provide information, or application for withdrawal – nominated position does not correspond to ANZSCO specification – position based in franchise, with mass or standardised production – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 140GB(2), 140GBA, 359(2), 359C, 360(3), 363A
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), rr 2.72(10)(aa), 2.73
CASE

Hasran v MIAC [2010] FCAFC 40
STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection on 26 September 2017 to refuse to approve the applicant’s nomination under s.140GB of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) and r.2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations).
The applicant applied for approval on 1 December 2016. A nomination of an occupation for a Subclass 457 visa is made under s.140GB of the Act and r.2.73 of the Regulations. Regulations 2.72(3) to (12) prescribe the criteria that must be satisfied for the Minister to approve a nomination by a person. These criteria are extracted in the attachment to this decision. For nomination applications made from 23 November 2013, additional criteria are specified in s.140GBA.
The delegate decided not to approve the nomination on the basis they were not satisfied that the occupation was applicable to the person identified in the nomination in accordance with the specification as required by r.2.72(10)(aa).
On 16 July 2020 the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant pursuant to s.359(2) of the Act, inviting the review applicant to provide updated and current information about the various requirements in r.2.72 of the Regulations and s.140GB of the Act. The letter also advised that, in order for the nomination of a position to be approved, the Tribunal must be satisfied that all of the relevant criteria in r.2.72 and s.140GB are met at the time of its decision.
The invitation was sent to the last email address provided in connection with the review and advised that, if the information was not provided in writing by 30 July 2020 the Tribunal may make a decision on the review without taking further steps to obtain the information and the review applicant would lose any entitlement they might otherwise have had under the Act to appear before the Tribunal to give evidence and present arguments.
On 24 July 2020 the applicant’s representative requested the Tribunal extend the due date for a further two weeks from 30 July 2020 due to delays caused by COVID-19. On 27 July 2020, the Tribunal granted the requested and advised that the information was now due on 13 August 2020. The Tribunal’s letter also advised that if the information was not provided by this date the Tribunal may make a decision on the review without taking further steps to obtain the information and the review applicant would lose any entitlement they might otherwise have had under the Act to appear before the Tribunal to give evidence and present arguments.
On 12 August 2020 the applicant’s representative advised the Tribunal that the review applicant may wish to withdraw the application for review, as they may not be able to offer the nominee employment due to COVID-19. He indicated he would formally advise the Tribunal on this matter shortly and asked if there was a specific form to be completed. On 13 August 2020 the Tribunal sent the representative a copy of the withdrawal form.
As the Tribunal had not received any correspondence from the applicant in relation to the proposed withdrawal or the s.359(2) letter, an officer of the Tribunal contacted the applicant’s representative via email on 2 September 2020 seeking an update on the case, and whether the review applicant wished to proceed with a withdrawal.
On 3 September 2020 the applicant’s representative advised that he had provided the relevant forms to the review applicant for the purpose of withdrawing the review application. However, the review applicant had not responded to the representative. He indicated that he would contact the applicant again and advise the Tribunal of the outcome. However, as at the date of the Tribunal’s decision, no further communication has been received from either the applicant or the representative. The review application has not been validly withdrawn and nor has any response been provided to the s.359(2) invitation sent on 16 July 2020.
The review applicant has not provided the information within the period as extended and no further extensions have been requested or granted. In these circumstances, s.359C of the Act applies and pursuant to s.360(3) the review applicant is not entitled to appear before the Tribunal. The effect of s.363A of the Act is that if a review applicant has no entitlement to a hearing, the Tribunal has no power to permit him or her to appear: Hasran v MIAC [2010] FCAFC 40.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the invitation to provide information was sent to the correct email. The invitation was not returned to sender as undeliverable mail and correspondence from the applicant’s representative indicates that it was received. To date, the requested information has not been provided and neither the applicant nor the representative has contacted the Tribunal to indicate that the information is forthcoming. The Tribunal is not required to delay indefinitely making its decision. In the circumstances, the Tribunal has decided to proceed to a decision without taking further steps to obtain the information.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided to affirm the decision under review to refuse the nomination.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets the criteria for approval of the nomination. The Tribunal must approve the nomination if the applicant is an approved sponsor and meets the requirements in r.2.72: s.140GB(2). The applicant must also have paid any nomination training contribution charge in relation to the nomination for which they are liable, but this liability only arises for nominations made from 12 August 2018. In addition, for nominations made from 23 November 2013, s.140GBA must be met.
The Tribunal’s letter to the applicant of 16 July 2020 invited the applicant to provide updated and current information about all the relevant requirements in r.2.72 and s.140GB. It also advised that, for the nomination to be approved, the Tribunal must be satisfied that all of the relevant criteria are met at the time of its decision. As stated above, the applicant did not respond to the Tribunal’s invitation and no updated and current information about the applicant or its business has been received. As the applicant has not provided the information requested, the Tribunal is unable to be satisfied that at the time of this decision the applicant meets the requirements for approval of the nomination.
Regulation 2.72(10)(aa) as it applies in this case, requires that the nominated occupation and its 6-digit code correspond to an occupation and 6-digit code specified in instrument IMMI 17/060, and the occupation must be applicable to the person identified in the nomination in accordance with the instrument.
In this case, the applicant operated a franchise of the Cheesecake Shop and nominated the position of a Pastrycook (ANZSCO 351112). According to IMMI 17/060 this occupation is not applicable where the nominated position relates to mass or standardised production (as opposed to specialist production), including the following: a position based in a franchise or factory; OR a position that, involves full or partial production of food product for distribution to another location, or predominantly involves the use of pre-prepared food product from another location.
On 11 September 2017 the Department wrote to the applicant and advised that the application may not be approved because they were subject to the inapplicability conditions set out above. They did not respond to that letter. The delegate considered that the position was based in a franchise, products are prepared in large quantities with limited range of products and that a significant amount of the nominee's time will be spent on routine support tasks in a food service environment baking standardised products. The delegate was satisfied that one or more of the restrictions applied to the nominated position and refused the nomination on the basis that r.2.72(10)(aa) was not met.
The applicant provided to the Tribunal copies of submissions that were presented to the Department with the visa application one of which was undated and the other was dated 20 September 2017. Broadly, these submissions included information regarding the operation of the business, the position description, the duties to be performed in the nominated position and addressed why they did not consider the inapplicability conditions applied to the business
The Tribunal has taken into account the material before it, including the submissions provided by the applicant. However, as r.2.72 must be met that the time of the Tribunal’s decision the Tribunal invited the applicant to provide updated and current information about a range of matters. This included updated information about the roles and duties of the nominated position, how they correspond to the position description in ANZSCO, where the nominated position sits within the organisation structure of the business, and their current financial circumstances. Without limiting the type of information that could be provided, the Tribunal suggested examples of information and/or documents that the applicant could provide included: job descriptions; work samples; emails; correspondence and other examples of the daily tasks performed in the nominated position; the ANZSCO description of the nominated occupation; an organisational structure chart including all current and proposed employees, their position title/duties and their immigration status; lodged tax returns for the last two financial years; business activity statements lodged with the ATO in the last 24 months; and financial statements showing profit and loss statements and balance sheets for the most recent two years. Further, as in this case, the nominated occupation was subject to an inapplicability condition (also called a caveat), the applicant was also asked to provide information about why the caveat/s should not apply in their circumstances. No response has been received to the invitation to provide information.
The applicant has not provided any current or updated information about the roles and duties of the nominated position or how they correspond to the nominated occupation’s position description in ANZSCO. Nor have they provided current information relevant to the inapplicability conditions specified in IMMI 17/060 and described above. In the circumstances, the Tribunal is unable to be satisfied that, at the time of its decision, the nominated occupation and its 6-digit code correspond to an occupation and 6-digit code specified in instrument IMMI 17/060, and that the occupation is applicable to the person identified in the nomination in accordance with the instrument. Accordingly, the requirements in r.2.72(10)(aa) are not met.
Further, the applicant has also not provided updated and current information about the nominated position, the structure of the business and the financial circumstances of the applicant. In these circumstances, the Tribunal is unable to be satisfied, at the time of its decision, that the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine. Accordingly, the requirements in r.2.72(10)(f) are also not met.
For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant meets the r.2.72(10) and is not satisfied that the applicant meets the applicable criteria for the nomination to be approved. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.
DECISION
The Tribunal affirms the decision not to approve the nomination.
R. Skaros
Senior Member

ATTACHMENT - EXTRACTS FROM THE MIGRATION REGULATIONS 1994
2.72 Criteria for approval of nomination — Subclass 457…
(1)This regulation applies to a person who is:
(a)is any of the following:
(i) a standard business sponsor;
(ii) a person who has applied to be a standard business sponsor;
(iii) a party to a work agreement (other than a Minister);
(iv) a party to negotiations to a work agreement (other than a Minister); and
(b)a party to a work agreement (other than a Minister);
who, under paragraph 140GB (1) (b) of the Act, has nominated an occupation in relation to a holder of, or an applicant or a proposed applicant for, a [Subclass 457 visa].
(2)For subsection 140GB (2) of the Act, the criteria that must be satisfied for the Minister to approve a nomination by a person are set out in subregulations (3) to (12).
(3)The Minister is satisfied that the person has made the nomination in accordance with the process set out in regulation 2.73.
(4)The Minister is satisfied that the person is:
(a)a standard business sponsor; or
(b)a party to a work agreement (other than a Minister).
(5)The Minister is satisfied that the person has identified in the nomination the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, who will work in the nominated occupation.
(6)If the person identifies a holder of a [Subclass 457 visa] (the visa holder) for subregulation (5), the Minister is satisfied that the person:
(a)has listed on the nomination each other holder of a visa of that kind who was granted the visa on the basis of having the necessary relationship with the visa holder as mentioned in clause 457.321 of Schedule 2; and
(b)if the Minister requires the visa holder to demonstrate that he or she has the skills necessary to perform the occupation — the visa holder demonstrates that he or she has those skills in the manner specified by the Minister.
(7)For paragraph (6) (a), the Minister may disregard the fact that 1 or more persons required to be listed on the nomination are not listed, if the Minister is satisfied it is reasonable in the circumstances to do so.
(7A)In addition to subregulation (6):
(a)if:
(i)       the person identifies a holder of a [Subclass 457 visa] (the visa holder) for subregulation (5); and
(ii)      the [Subclass 457 visa] was granted after the Minister had waived the requirements of paragraph 4006A (1) (c) of Schedule 4 on the basis of a written undertaking made by the current sponsor of the visa holder (as set out in subclause 4006A (2) of that Schedule);
the Minister is satisfied that the person has provided, in writing, an undertaking that is equivalent to the undertaking made by the current sponsor of the visa holder; and
(b)if:
(i)       the person identifies a holder of a [Subclass 457 visa] (the visa holder) for subregulation (5); and
(ii)      the person has listed on the nomination a person described in paragraph (6) (a); and
(iii)     the [Subclass 457 visa] was granted to the person described in paragraph (6) (a) after the Minister had waived the requirements of paragraph 4006A (1) (c) of Schedule 4 on the basis of a written undertaking made by the current sponsor of the visa holder (as set out in subclause 4006A (2) of that Schedule);
the Minister is satisfied that the person has provided, in writing, an undertaking that is equivalent to the undertaking made by the current sponsor of the visa holder.
(8)If the nomination was made before 1 July 2010 — the Minister is satisfied that the person has provided the following information as part of the nomination:
(a)if there is a 6‑digit ASCO code for the nominated occupation — the 6-digit ASCO code;
(b)if there is no 6-digit ASCO code for the occupation, and the person is a standard business sponsor — the name of the occupation as it appears in the instrument in writing made for the purposes of paragraph (10) (a);
(c)if there is no 6-digit ASCO code for the occupation and the person is a party to a work agreement — the name of the occupation as it appears in the work agreement;
(d)the location or locations at which the nominated occupation is to be carried out.
(8A)If the nomination is made on or after 1 July 2010 – the Minister is satisfied that the person has provided the following information as part of the nomination:
(a)if there is a 6-digit ANZSCO code for the nominated occupation - the name of the occupation and the corresponding 6-digit ANZSCO code;
(b)if:
(i)       there is no 6-digit ANZSCO code for the nominated occupation; and
(ii)      the person is a standard business sponsor;
the name of the occupation and the corresponding 6-digit code as they are specified in the instrument in writing made for paragraph (10)(aa);
(c)if:
(i)       there is no 6-digit ANZSCO code for the nominated occupation; and
(ii)      the person is a party to a work agreement;
the name of the occupation and the corresponding 6-digit code (if any) as they are specified in the work agreement;
(d)the location or locations at which the nominated occupation is to be carried out.
(8B)The Minister is satisfied that the person has, in writing, certified as part of the nomination whether or not the person has engaged in conduct, in relation to the nomination, that constitutes a contravention of subsection 245AR(1) of the Act.;
(9)The Minister is satisfied that either:
(a)there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person or a person associated with the person; or
(b)it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person or a person associated with the person.
(10)If the person is a standard business sponsor — the Minister is satisfied that:
(a)if the nomination was made before 1 July 2010 - the nominated occupation corresponds to an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph; and
(aa)if the nomination is made on or after 1 July 2010 – the nominated occupation and its corresponding 6-digit code correspond to an occupation and its corresponding 6-digit code specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph and the occupation is applicable to the person identified in the nomination in accordance with the specification of the occupation; and
(b)if required by the instrument mentioned in paragraph (a) or (aa) — the nomination of an occupation mentioned in the instrument is supported, in writing to the Minister, by an organisation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph; and
(c)the terms and conditions of employment of the person identified in the nomination will be no less favourable than the terms and conditions (including, if applicable, the terms and conditions provided by an enterprise agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009) that are provided or would be provided to an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident for performing equivalent work at the same location; and
(cc)the base rate of pay, under the terms and conditions of employment mentioned in paragraph (c), that:
(i)       are provided; or
(ii)      would be provided;
to an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident, will be greater than the temporary skilled migration income threshold specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph; and
(d)if the nomination was made before 1 July 2010 - the person has certified as part of the nomination, in writing, that:
(i)       the tasks of the position include a significant majority of the tasks of:
(A)the nominated occupation listed in the ASCO; or
(B)the nominated occupation specified in an instrument in writing for paragraph (a); and
(ii)      if the person is lawfully operating a business outside Australia but does not lawfully operate a business in Australia:
(A)the nominated occupation is a position in the business of the standard business sponsor; or
(B)the nominated occupation is an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-paragraph; and
(iii)     if the person lawfully operates a business in Australia:
(A)the nominated occupation is a position with a business, or an associated entity, of the person; or
(B)the nominated occupation is an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-paragraph; and
(iv)     the qualifications and experience of the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, identified in relation to the nominated occupation are commensurate with the qualifications and experience specified:
(A)for the occupation in the ASCO; or
(B)if there is no ASCO code for the nominated occupation — for the occupation in the instrument in writing made for the purpose of paragraph (a); and
(e)if the nomination is made on or after 1 July 2010 – the person has certified as part of the nomination, in writing, that:
(i)       the tasks of the position include a significant majority of the tasks of:
(A)the nominated occupation listed in the ANZSCO; or
(B)the nominated occupation specified in an instrument in writing for paragraph (aa); and
(ii)      if the person is lawfully operating a business outside Australia but does not lawfully operate a business in Australia:
(A)the nominated occupation is a position in the business of the standard business sponsor; or
(B)the nominated occupation is an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph; and
(iii)     if the person lawfully operates a business in Australia:
(A)the nominated occupation is a position with a business, or an associated entity, of the person; or
(B)the nominated occupation is an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this sub-subparagraph; and
(iv)     the qualifications and experience of the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, identified in relation to the nominated occupation are commensurate with the qualifications and experience specified:
(A)for the occupation in the ANZSCO; or
(B)if there is no ANZSCO code for the nominated occupation - for the occupation in the instrument in writing made for paragraph (aa).
(f)the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine; and
(g)if the person has identified in the nomination the holder of a Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa in relation to whom the requirements in subclause 457.223(6) of Schedule 2 were met—one of the following applies:
(i)       the requirements in subclause 457.223(6) of Schedule 2 continue to be met;
(ii)      if:
(A)the holder would be required to hold a licence, registration or membership that is mandatory to perform the occupation nominated in relation to the holder; and
(B)in order to obtain the licence, registration or membership, the holder would need to demonstrate that the holder has undertaken a language test specified by the Minister under subparagraph 457.223(4)(eb)(iv) of Schedule 2 and achieved a score that is better than the score specified for the test by the Minister under subparagraph 457.223(4)(eb)(v) of Schedule 2;
the holder demonstrates that he or she has proficiency in English of at least the standard required for the grant (however described) of the licence, registration or membership;
(iii)     the holder is an exempt applicant within the meaning of subclause 457.223(4) of Schedule 2;
(iv)     unless subparagraph (ii) applies—the holder:
(A)has undertaken a language test specified by the Minister under subparagraph 457.223(4)(eb)(iv) of Schedule 2; and
(B)achieved within the period specified by the Minister in a legislative instrument for this subparagraph, in a single attempt at the test, the score specified by the Minister under subparagraph 457.223(4)(eb)(v) of Schedule 2; and
(h)either:
(i)       the person will:
(A)engage the visa holder, the applicant for a visa or the proposed applicant for a Subclass 457(Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa only as an employee under a written contract of employment; and
(B)give a copy of that contract to the Minister; or
(ii)      the nominated occupation is an occupation specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for sub-subparagraph (e)(iii)(B).
(10AA)For paragraphs (10) (c) and (cc), if no Australian citizen or Australian permanent resident performs equivalent work in the person’s workplace at the same location, the person must determine, using the method specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subregulation:
(a)the terms and conditions of employment; and
(b)the base rate of pay, under the terms and conditions of employment;
that would be provided to an Australian citizen or an Australian permanent resident to perform equivalent work in the person’s workplace at the same location.
(10AB)Paragraphs (10) (c) and (cc) do not apply if the annual earnings of the person identified in the nomination are equal to or greater than the amount specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subregulation.
(10A)The Minister may disregard the criterion in paragraph (10) (cc) for the purpose of subregulation (2) if:
(a)the base rate of pay will not be greater than the temporary skilled migration income threshold specified for that paragraph; and
(b)the annual earnings are equal to or greater than the temporary skilled migration income threshold; and
(c)the Minister considers it reasonable to do so.
(11)If the person is a party to a work agreement (other than a Minister) — the Minister is satisfied that:
(a)the nominated occupation is specified in the work agreement as an occupation that the person may nominate; and
(b)if the nomination was made before 1 July 2010 - the person has certified as part of the nomination, in writing, that:
(i)       the tasks of the position include a significant majority of the tasks of:
(A)if the nomination is made using an ASCO code - the nominated occupation listed in the ASCO; or
(B)if the nomination is not made using an ASCO code - the nominated occupation specified in the work agreement; and
(ii)      the qualifications and experience of the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, identified in relation to the nominated occupation are commensurate with the qualifications and experience specified for the occupation in the work agreement; and
(c)if the nomination is made on or after 1 July 2010 - the person has certified as part of the nomination, in writing, that:
(i)       the tasks of the position include a significant majority of the tasks of:
(A)if the nomination is made using an ANZSCO code - the nominated occupation listed in the ANZSCO; or
(B)if the nomination is not made using an ANZSCO code - the nominated occupation specified in the work agreement; and
(ii)      the qualifications and experience of the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, identified in relation to the nominated occupation are commensurate with the qualifications and experience specified for the occupation in the work agreement.
(12)If the person is a party to a work agreement and the work agreement specifies requirements that must be met by the party to the work agreement — the Minister is satisfied that the requirements of the work agreement have been met.

[2020] AATA 3885

25 September 2020

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Procedural Fairness

Jurisdiction