Lentils and All Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Lentils and All Pty Ltd against a decision to refuse the approval of a nominated position for a visa application. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nominated position, that of a full-time chef, was genuine and if the applicant met the necessary criteria under the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by a Tribunal member, Antonio Dronjic.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the nominated position was genuine, as stipulated by regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved a qualitative assessment of the position and its comparison with the nominated occupation, drawing on principles established in cases such as *Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP* [2016] FCA 30. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant, the sponsoring business, had demonstrated a genuine need for a full-time chef, given the restaurant's limited operating hours and the nominee's qualifications and work experience.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the evidence presented regarding the restaurant's operational capacity. The business was closed for a period and subsequently operated only on Thursdays and Fridays for dinner, and on weekends for lunch. This limited operational schedule led the Tribunal to conclude that there was no genuine need for a full-time chef. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the nominee lacked relevant qualifications and past work experience as a chef, holding instead a Bachelor of Accounting degree and experience in sales and marketing. The Tribunal found that the purpose of the visa scheme was not to train individuals in occupations for which they lacked the necessary background.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination, finding that the requirements of regulation 2.72(10)(f) were not met due to the lack of a genuine need for the nominated full-time position and the nominee's insufficient qualifications and experience.