SABA PACIFIC PTY LTD (Migration)
Case
•
[2021] AATA 1679
•6 April 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
SABA PACIFIC PTY LTD (Migration) [2021] AATA 1679
[2021] AATA 1679
6 April 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by SABA PACIFIC PTY LTD for approval of a nominated position under the Temporary Residence Transition nomination stream. The applicant sought review of a decision that had not approved the nomination. The Tribunal considered the material before it, determining that a hearing was not necessary pursuant to s 360(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met all the requirements for the approval of the nomination as set out in regulation 5.19(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). This involved assessing compliance with requirements relating to the application form, the nominator's status as an actively and lawfully operating business, and the nominee's previous employment history in the nominated occupation.
The Tribunal found that the nomination application was compliant with regulation 5.19(3)(a), as it was in the approved form, accompanied by the prescribed fee, and identified a relevant person and occupation with a demonstrated need for the nominator to employ them. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nominator met the criteria in regulation 5.19(3)(b), being an actively and lawfully operating business in Australia and having not met certain overseas business operation criteria in its most recent sponsorship approval. The Tribunal also found that the nominee met the employment requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(3)(c).
Based on its findings that all relevant requirements of regulation 5.19 were met, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met all the requirements for the approval of the nomination as set out in regulation 5.19(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). This involved assessing compliance with requirements relating to the application form, the nominator's status as an actively and lawfully operating business, and the nominee's previous employment history in the nominated occupation.
The Tribunal found that the nomination application was compliant with regulation 5.19(3)(a), as it was in the approved form, accompanied by the prescribed fee, and identified a relevant person and occupation with a demonstrated need for the nominator to employ them. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nominator met the criteria in regulation 5.19(3)(b), being an actively and lawfully operating business in Australia and having not met certain overseas business operation criteria in its most recent sponsorship approval. The Tribunal also found that the nominee met the employment requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(3)(c).
Based on its findings that all relevant requirements of regulation 5.19 were met, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0