Pan Thai Restaurant Pty Ltd (Migration)

Pan Thai Restaurant Pty Ltd (Migration) [2019] AATA 1542 (5 March 2019)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  Pan Thai Restaurant Pty Ltd
CASE NUMBER:  1712170
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):           BCC2017/168858
MEMBER:K. Chapman
DATE:5 March 2019
PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane
DECISION:The Tribunal sets aside the decision not to approve the nomination and substitutes a decision that the nomination is approved.

Statement made on 05 March 2019 at 9:11am
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – nomination refusal– standard business sponsor– Cafe or Restaurant Manager – nominee holds the necessary qualifications and experience to fulfill the position –the position is genuine – submission is consistent with the oral evidence provided at hearing– decision under review set aside
LEGISLATION
Fair Work Act 2009
Migration Act 1958, ss 140GB, 245AR, 359(2)
Migration Regulations 1994, rr 1.13, 2.72, 2.73, 2.57
CASES
Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP [2016] FCA 30
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 May 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, Pan Thai Restaurant Pty Ltd (‘the nominator’), applied for approval on 13 January 2017. The applicant nominated Miss Thanwarat Malai (‘the nominee’) in the occupation of Cafe or Restaurant Manager, which is coded as number 141111 in the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (known as ‘ANZSCO’). 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 that the applicant did not satisfy r.2.72(10)(f) due to a lack of satisfaction that the position associated with the nominated occupation of Cafe or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO 141111) is genuine. On 8 June 2017, the applicant applied to the Tribunal for review of the nomination decision, providing a copy of that decision with their application for review.
On 8 January 2019, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant pursuant to subsection 359(2) of the Act inviting them to provide current information addressing the relevant criteria under r.2.72 of the Regulations and s.140GB of the Act. In response the Tribunal received material including, but not limited to, written submissions, photographs, menus, payscale.com average salary overview, standard business sponsorship approval, financial documents, taxation documents, ASIC company extract, organisational chart, duties and responsibilities overview, email communication with Camp Hill Community Club, a statement from the Camp Hill Community Club, VEVO check, examples of functions catered by the applicant, restaurant reviews, promotional material, salary statements, personal profile of the nominee, duties statement from the nominee and IELTS results. All submitted material has been duly considered by the Tribunal.
The applicant, through its Managing Director, Ms Amonpan Sirattanapusitakon, appeared before the Tribunal on 28 February 2019 to give evidence and present arguments. The nominee also gave oral evidence. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Thai and English languages, noting that the majority of oral evidence was provided in the English language. The applicant and nominee confirmed to the Tribunal that they understood the interpreter. The applicant was represented in relation to the review by its registered migration agent.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has decided to set aside the decision under review and substitute a decision approving 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). In addition, for nominations made from 23 November 2013, s.140GBA must be met.
The nominated person in the nomination application is Miss Thanwarat Malai (the nominee). She is nominated pursuant to s.140GB of the Act on the basis that she will work in the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager. Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicable provision in this case is r.2.72 as in force immediately before 18 March 2018.
Key considerations in the present matter are whether the applicant is performing the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager and if an inapplicability condition (also known as a ‘caveat’ in Departmental policy) pertaining to this occupation is satisfied.
The nomination must comply with the prescribed process
Regulation 2.72(3) requires that the applicant has made the nomination in accordance with the process set out in r.2.73.
The applicant lodged their application for nomination identifying the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO 141111) to be performed by Miss Thanwarat Malai who is an applicant for a Subclass 457 visa. Having regard to the evidence, the Tribunal is satisfied that the application was made on the approved form identifying Brisbane, Queensland as the location where the occupation will be carried out, it was accompanied by the prescribed fee and included written certification indicating the applicant had not engaged in any conduct that constituted a contravention of s.245AR(1) of the Act.
Further, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a standard business sponsor and the nomination identifies the six digit ANZSCO code for an occupation contained in a legislative instrument as an approved occupation for the purpose of the Subclass 457 visa.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(3) are met.
Nominator is a standard business sponsor or party to a work agreement
Regulation 2.72(4) requires that the person making a nomination is either a standard business sponsor or a party to a work agreement other than a Minister.
The applicant submitted a copy of their Sponsorship Approval Notice from the Department indicating they are an approved standard business sponsor for the period 23 December 2016 to 23 December 2021.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(4) are met.
Identification of the nominee
Regulation 2.72(5) requires that the applicant identify in the nomination the visa holder, or the applicant or proposed applicant for the visa, who will work in the nominated occupation.
Having regard to the application for nomination and supporting documentary evidence, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant identified Miss Thanwarat Malai as the visa applicant who will work in the nominated occupation.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(5) are met.
Requirements for existing Subclass 457 visa holders
The criteria for approval of a nomination contain several requirements if a Subclass 457 visa holder is identified as the person to work in the nominated position.
As the nominee is not the holder of a Subclass 457 visa, the requirements of r.2.72(6), (7A) and (10)(g) do not apply.
Information about the nominated occupation
Regulation 2.72(8A) requires the applicant to provide the following information as part of the nomination:
·the name of the occupation and the corresponding 6-digit ANZSCO code if there is one; and
·the location(s) at which the nominated occupation is to be carried out.
The Tribunal finds that the applicant has identified the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO 141111) and Brisbane, Queensland as the location where it will be carried out.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(8A) are met.
Certification relating to conduct under s.245AR(1)
Regulation 2.72(8B) requires that the applicant has, as part of the nomination, certified in writing whether or not they have engaged in conduct, in relation to the nomination, that constitutes a contravention of s.245AR(1) of the Act.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the application for nomination was accompanied by the appropriate written certification indicating the applicant had not engaged in any conduct that constituted a contravention of s.245AR(1) of the Act.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(8B) are met.
No adverse information known to Immigration
Regulation 2.72(9) requires that either: there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the applicant or a person associated with the applicant; or it is reasonable to disregard such information. For these purposes, ‘adverse information’ and ‘associated with’ have the meaning given in rr.1.13A and 1.13B.
There is no evidence of adverse information contained in the Department file, or before the Tribunal, about the applicant or a person associated with the applicant.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(9) are met.
Specified occupation
Subclause 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 certain circumstances this instrument may also require the nomination of an occupation to be supported in writing to the Minister, by a specified organisation before the nomination can be approved: r.2.72(10)(b).
The applicant nominated the nominee in the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO Code 141111). The aforementioned occupation has attached to it the following inapplicability condition (or ‘caveat’) in accordance with instrument IMMI 17/060:
· Item 8 – The position is in a limited service restaurant.
Ms Sirattanapusitakon gave oral evidence concerning the operations of the restaurant and the duties of the nominee which may be summarised as follows. She outlined that she has run the Pan Thai Restaurant since January 2008. Initially she was the restaurant manager herself, however after having a child in 2011 her health began to suffer by way of knee and back problems. Over the years the restaurant established a close professional relationship with the adjacent Camp Hill Community Club. Ms Sirattanapusitakon explained that the restaurant offers full table service, operates a commercial kitchen, takes bookings, conducts functions, serves alcohol, and provides cooked to order meals which are freshly made on the premises. Much of the customer base is derived from Camp Hill Community Club patrons who choose to dine at the restaurant.
Ms Sirattanapusitakon advised that the nominee began working at the restaurant in 2014 as a member of the casual wait staff. As her own health began to suffer, from 2015 Ms Sirattanapusitakon was able to slowly increase the managerial responsibilities of the nominee given the potential she displayed. When the nominee finished her management studies in 2016, Ms Sirattanapusitakon offered her the position of restaurant manager given her own health precluded her from continuing in the role. Ms Sirattanapusitakon indicated that the nominee has been working well in the role of restaurant manager and is responsible for between ten to fifteen staff at any one time, the majority of whom are Australian citizens. Ms Sirattanapusitakon told the Tribunal she rarely works in the restaurant now due to her health problems and that the nominee is vital for the business to continue to operate.
The nominee provided oral evidence to the Tribunal consistent with that given by Ms Sirattanapusitakon. The nominee explained her duties, advised she now had over two years’ experience managing the restaurant and added that she hoped to continue in the role. She confirmed to the Tribunal that she has obtained a Diploma in Management, conferred in 2016. Both Ms Sirattanapusitakon and the nominee advised that the restaurant underwent expansion in 2018 with the addition of an outside seating area, partly funded by a grant from the local council. Ms Sirattanapusitakon indicated that the restaurant has a loyal fan base which in part is attributable to the work done by the nominee.
The Tribunal had the benefit of observing Ms Sirattanapusitakon and the nominee provide their oral evidence in a direct and free flowing fashion. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that they provided truthful oral evidence and places high weight upon it. Additionally, the Tribunal is satisfied that submitted documentary evidence such as photographs, supporting statements, a position description and an organisational chart is consistent with the oral evidence provided during the review hearing. Following careful consideration of the evidence, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant operates a full service restaurant. Therefore, nomination of the occupation is not precluded by an inapplicability condition (or ‘caveat’). Additionally, the evidence points to the nominee performing tasks and duties that are commensurate with the occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager as defined in ANZSCO. The Tribunal so finds.
For the above reasons, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nominated occupation is not affected by an inapplicability condition, the requirements of r.2.72(10)(aa) are met and the requirements of r.2.72(10)(b) are not applicable.
Terms and conditions of employment
Regulation 2.72(10)(c) requires that the terms and conditions of employment of the nominee will be no less favourable than those that are, or would be, provided to an Australian citizen or permanent resident performing equivalent work at the same location. For nomination applications made after 1 December 2015, this expressly includes, if applicable, the terms and conditions provided by an enterprise agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009.
A set of terms and conditions of employment is less favourable than another set if the earnings provided for in the first set are less than those in the other set and there is no substantial contrary evidence that the first set is not less favourable than the other set: r.2.57(3A). ‘Earnings’ is defined in r.2.57A and includes the person’s wages; amounts applied or dealt with in any way on the person’s behalf or as the person directs; and the agreed money value of non-monetary benefits. Non-monetary benefits are benefits other than an entitlement to a payment of money to which the employee is entitled in return for the performance of work and for which a reasonable money value has been agreed by the employee and the employer. Reimbursements are specifically excluded, as are payments the amount of which cannot be determined in advance, and certain contributions to a superannuation fund.
In circumstances where there are no Australian citizens or permanent residents performing equivalent work at the same location, the person must determine the terms and conditions of employment that would otherwise be provided by a method specified in instrument IMMI 09/113: r.2.72(10AA). It is not in dispute that no Australian citizens or permanent residents are performing equivalent work at the same location as the nominee.
The nominee’s terms and conditions of employment are evidenced in her submitted employment agreement dated 5 August 2016. She receives a base annual salary of $53,900 with additional superannuation payments. Submitted recruitment advertisements and explanatory statements point to the nominee receiving terms and conditions of employment that are no less favourable than those which would be provided to an Australian worker performing her nominated occupation at the restaurant.
Following careful consideration of the evidence, the Tribunal finds that the terms and conditions of employment of the nominee will be no less favourable than those that are, or would be, provided to an Australian citizen or Australian permanent resident performing equivalent work at the same location.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(10)(c) are met.
Base rate of pay
Regulation 2.72(10)(cc) requires the base rate of pay under the terms and conditions of employment that are, or would be, provided to an Australian citizen or permanent resident will be greater than the temporary skilled migration income threshold (TSMIT) specified in the instrument IMMI 13/028, which specifies the relevant amount as $53,900.
The base rate of pay of the nominee is $53,900 per annum and the Tribunal is satisfied that an Australian citizen or permanent resident would receive the same remuneration in the nominated position. Given the aforementioned base rate of pay, the Tribunal is satisfied that r.2.72(10)(cc) is met.
Certification under r.2.72(10)(e)
As part of the nomination, the applicant must certify various matters in writing: r.2.72(10)(e). These include that:
·the tasks of the position include a significant majority of the tasks of the nominated occupation listed in the ANZSCO or specified in the relevant instrument;
·if the applicant is lawfully operating a business outside, but not in, Australia, the nominated occupation is in the business of the standard business sponsor or is specified in the relevant instrument;
·if the applicant lawfully operates a business in Australia, the nominated occupation is with a business, or an associated entity, of the applicant or else, is an occupation specified in the relevant instrument; and
·the qualifications and experience of the nominee are commensurate with those specified for the occupation in the ANZSCO or, if there is no ANZSCO code, in the relevant instrument.
The applicant lawfully operates a business within Australia and the Tribunal is satisfied that it truthfully made the necessary certifications in the application for nomination.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(10)(e) are met.
Position must be genuine
Regulation 2.72(10)(f) requires that the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine. This was considered in Cargo First Pty Ltd v MIBP [2016] FCA 30, where the Court (at [34]) upheld the Tribunal’s approach of qualitatively assessing the position and comparing this with the occupation nominated in order to determine whether it was genuine.
For reasons previously expressed, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nominee will perform the role of a Café or Restaurant Manager as defined in ANZSCO and that she will not perform a lower level occupation. Further, the Tribunal is satisfied that the employment of the nominee is critical to the commercial viability of the applicant’s business. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that the position associated with the nominated occupation of Café or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO 141111) is genuine.
Therefore, the requirements of r.2.72(10)(f) are met.
Employment under contract
Regulation 2.72(10)(h) requires that the applicant will engage the nominee only as an employee under a written contract of employment and give a copy of that to the Minister, unless the nominated occupation is specified in the relevant instrument.
The applicant submitted a copy of the employment contract dated 5 August 2016 with respect to the nominee and the Tribunal is satisfied that she is employed pursuant to it.
For these reasons the requirements of r.2.72(10)(h) are met.
Work agreements
Separate criteria apply where the applicant is a party to a work agreement (other than a Minister): r.2.72(11), (12). In these circumstances, the nominated occupation must be specified in the work agreement as an occupation that the person may nominate. Certain matters relating to the tasks of the position and the qualifications and experience of the nominee must be certified as part of the nomination. In addition, if the work agreement specifies requirements that must be met by applicant, these must have been met.

The applicant is not a party to a work agreement, and for this reason the requirements of r.2.72(11) and (12) are not applicable.
Labour Market Testing
Section 140GBA requires a standard business sponsor who nominates an occupation and associated position, to fulfil the ‘labour market testing condition’ unless the major disaster or skill and occupational exemptions in s.140GBB-140GBC apply, or the Minister has determined it would be inconsistent with a specified international trade obligation.
For these purposes, labour market testing means testing of the Australian labour market to demonstrate whether a suitably qualified and experienced Australian citizen or permanent resident is readily available to fill the position.
In this matter, the nominated occupation is Café or Restaurant Manager (ANZSCO 141111). This occupation is classified as Skill Level 2 in ANZSCO, with such occupations being specified for the purposes of the occupational exemptions in s.140GBC(4)(b): IMMI 13/137. The relevant occupation description in ANZSCO provides that generally the minimum required qualification for the position is a Diploma. The Tribunal is satisfied the nominee holds the necessary qualifications and experience to fulfill the position of a Café or Restaurant Manager. Therefore, the skill and occupational exemption is satisfied.
For these reasons, the labour market testing requirements in s.140GBA are not applicable.
Accordingly, the applicant meets all the applicable criteria for the nomination to be approved.
DECISION
The Tribunal sets aside the decision not to approve the nomination and substitutes a decision that the nomination is approved.
K. Chapman
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.

[2019] AATA 1542

5 March 2019

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Statutory Construction

Procedural Fairness

Remedies