Rosepalm Holdings Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning the approval of a nomination under the Direct Entry nomination stream for the occupation of cook. The applicant sought to have the decision to refuse the nomination reviewed.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements for approval of the nomination under regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, as required by regulation 5.19(4)(b)(i).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the nomination. The Department of Home Affairs had refused the nomination application because information indicated that the business, BAILEY BAR AND BISTRO, had ceased to operate. The applicant was invited to comment on this adverse information but failed to provide a response. Subsequently, the Tribunal also invited the applicant to provide updated information regarding their compliance with the relevant criteria, but no response was received within the prescribed period. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's registered migration agent had indicated a wish to withdraw the application as the applicant had been granted a different visa and did not wish to proceed with the AAT review, however, the withdrawal form only related to the associated subclass 187 visa nominee. Given the lack of response and the failure to satisfy the criteria under regulation 5.19(4), the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements for approval.