SA GREEN GLORY PTY. LTD. (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a migration matter involving SA Green Glory Pty Ltd as the applicant and the delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection as the respondent. The dispute concerned the approval of a nominated position for a Marketing Specialist (ANZSCO code 225113) for a proposed Subclass 457 visa applicant, Mr Chi Yuan. The nomination was lodged on 2 December 2016, with a proposed base salary of $65,000 per annum plus superannuation.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether SA Green Glory Pty Ltd, as the nominator, met the criteria for the approval of the nomination under section 140GB(2) of the Migration Act 1958 and Regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess if the nomination complied with the prescribed process, if the nominator was a standard business sponsor, if the nominee was correctly identified, if there was any adverse information known to Immigration, if the nominated occupation corresponded to a specified occupation in the relevant instrument (IMMI 17/060), and if the terms and conditions of employment for the nominee would be no less favourable than those provided to an Australian citizen or permanent resident performing equivalent work.

The Tribunal found that SA Green Glory Pty Ltd had complied with the procedural requirements for lodging the nomination, was a standard business sponsor, and had correctly identified the proposed visa applicant. It was satisfied that no adverse information was known to Immigration concerning the applicant or associated persons. Furthermore, the nominated occupation and its ANZSCO code were found to correspond to those specified in IMMI 17/060, and the occupation was applicable to the proposed nominee. The Tribunal also considered the terms and conditions of employment, noting that the base rate of pay was $65,000 per annum, which was considered sufficient for the nominated position.

Having determined that SA Green Glory Pty Ltd met all applicable criteria for the nomination, the Tribunal set aside the original decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision approving the nomination.