Salas Rodriguez (Migration)

[2024] AATA 1608

Salas Rodriguez (Migration) [2024] AATA 1608 (6 March 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mrs Maria

Cristina Salas Rodriguez

Mr Ramon Paneda Soto

REPRESENTATIVE:  Ms Requel Ogle (MARN: 1279892)

CASE NUMBER:  2103823

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2021/163582

MEMBER:K. Chapman

DATE:6 March 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 482 visa:

·cl 482.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 06 March 2024 at 5:20pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa – Subclass 482 – Medium-term stream – Maintenance Planner – Tribunal set aside the Department’s decision and substituted a decision that the nomination be approved –approved nomination – decision under review remitted    

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, s 65
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 482.212

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs, on 15 March 2021, to refuse to grant the visa applicants Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (‘the Act’).

2. The first named applicant applied for the visa on 27 January 2021, including the second named applicant in the visa application. In the present matter, the first named applicant (hereafter ‘the applicant’) seeks the visa to work in the nominated occupation of Maintenance Planner (ANZSCO 312911). Her position was nominated by Crystal Blue Yacht Charters Pty Ltd (‘the nominator’). The nominator operates a luxury yacht charter business, incorporating a shore based hospitality venue, headquartered at a marina on the Gold Coast, Queensland.

3. At the time of application, Class GK contained one subclass: Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage). The criteria for a Subclass 482 visa are set out in Part 482 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (‘the Regulations’). Applicants seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa must meet the ‘Common criteria’ and the criteria of one of three alternative streams: the Short-term stream, the Medium-term stream, or the Labour Agreement stream. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria. In this matter, the applicant is seeking the visa in the Medium-term stream.

4. The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl 482.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, because she was not the subject of an approved nomination as required. On 25 March 2021, the applicant applied to the Tribunal for review of the visa refusal decision. A copy of the delegate’s decision was provided with her application for review.

5. The applicant appeared by video before the Tribunal on 15 February 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The hearing was, by consent, combined with the associated nominator review pertaining to the application for nomination and with another nomination and nominee matter relating to the nominator. Accordingly, Mr David Fisher of the nominator also appeared by video before the Tribunal. Both Ms Salas Rodriguez and Mr Fisher confirmed they were comfortable participating in the hearing by video. The Tribunal observed Ms Salas Rodriguez and Mr Fisher to provide their evidence in a direct and engaging fashion. The Tribunal is satisfied they are both witnesses of credit and accordingly their evidence at the hearing is afforded high weight.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets the requirements of cl 482.212.

   Requirement for an approved nomination

8. Clause 482.212(1) requires that the nomination identified in the visa application is approved, was made by a person who was an approved work sponsor at the time of approval, and it has not ceased.

9. The Tribunal notes that the nomination of the applicant for the position of Maintenance Planner (ANZSCO 312911) by Crystal Blue Yacht Charters Pty Ltd (‘the nominator’) was refused by the Department on 9 February 2021. However, on 6 March 2024, the Tribunal set aside the decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision that the nomination is approved (see AAT matter 2102379).

10. Following careful consideration of the evidence, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination of the applicant in the occupation of Maintenance Planner (ANZSCO 312911) has been approved under s 140GB of the Act and reg 2.72 of the Regulations. Furthermore, the Tribunal is satisfied that at the time of the aforementioned approval, the nominator was a standard business sponsor. Additionally, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination has not ceased.

11. For these reasons the requirements of cl 482.212(1) are satisfied by the applicant.

    Other relevant matters

12. Given the delay in this review caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Tribunal has proceeded to determine the other relevant matters contained in cl 482.212.

13. Having regard to the evidence of the applicant and the nominator at the review hearing, and relevant documentary evidence from the nominator’s review application, the Tribunal is satisfied of the following matters. The applicant’s intention to perform the nominated occupation is genuine and the position associated with the nominated occupation is also genuine. The applicant has the skills, qualifications and employment background necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation. The Tribunal does not consider it necessary for the applicant to demonstrate the skills necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation, given it is satisfied of her skills based upon the submitted evidence.

14. Accordingly, the applicant satisfies cl 482.212(2) and cl 482.212(3), with cl 482.212(4) not being relevant to the present review.

    CONCLUSION

15. Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the matter to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for Subclass 482 visas.

16. The Tribunal finds that as the second named applicant applied for the visa on the basis of being a member of the family unit of the applicant, his outcome will be determined by reference to the outcome of the latter’s application on remittal to the Department for reconsideration.

    DECISION

17. The Tribunal remits the application for Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 482 visa:

    ·cl 482.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    K. Chapman
    Member