Lokabut Enterprises Pty Ltd (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 6023
•18 September 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Lokabut Enterprises Pty Ltd (Migration) [2019] AATA 6023
[2019] AATA 6023
18 September 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Cth) considered an appeal by Lokabut Enterprises Pty Ltd concerning a decision not to approve its nomination for a skilled migration visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the nominated position of "Chef" was genuine, as required by migration regulations.
The Tribunal was tasked with determining if the nominated position met the criteria for approval, specifically whether the position was genuine under regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved a qualitative assessment of the nominated position against the applicant's commercial operations and the occupation as defined by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO).
The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had provided limited evidence regarding its commercial operations and failed to respond to requests for information from the Department and the Tribunal. Citing *Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP* [2016] FCA 30, the Tribunal affirmed the need for a qualitative assessment of the position's genuineness. Given the lack of contemporary evidence of commercial activity and the failure to respond to invitations to provide supporting information, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine or that the business required the nominee's services. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to approve the nomination.
The Tribunal was tasked with determining if the nominated position met the criteria for approval, specifically whether the position was genuine under regulation 2.72(10)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved a qualitative assessment of the nominated position against the applicant's commercial operations and the occupation as defined by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO).
The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had provided limited evidence regarding its commercial operations and failed to respond to requests for information from the Department and the Tribunal. Citing *Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP* [2016] FCA 30, the Tribunal affirmed the need for a qualitative assessment of the position's genuineness. Given the lack of contemporary evidence of commercial activity and the failure to respond to invitations to provide supporting information, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine or that the business required the nominee's services. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to approve the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Natural Justice
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2002] FCA 617
Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
[2012] FMCA 28
Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP
[2016] FCA 30