SCORER (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Lyndon Reece Scorer against the refusal of his application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, under the standard business sponsor stream. The nominated occupation was Chef. The primary dispute revolved around whether Mr Scorer met the skills, qualifications, and employment background requirements for the nominated occupation, as well as the validity of his nomination in light of legislative changes. The decision was made by Alan McMurran of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr Scorer met the requirements of clause 457.223(4) of the Migration Regulations. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess whether Mr Scorer possessed the necessary skills, qualifications, and employment background to perform the tasks of a Chef, and if he had demonstrated these skills in the manner required by the Minister. A further issue arose concerning the status of the nomination, as the approval had expired prior to the visa refusal, and legislative amendments had altered the framework for subclass 457 nominations.

The Tribunal found that Mr Scorer had not provided sufficient evidence to satisfy the requirements regarding his skills and experience. Despite submissions from his representative suggesting a "broad view" of his experience, the Tribunal placed little weight on the limited documentation provided, which included a generic letter of reference and an employment contract. The Tribunal noted the absence of detailed particulars of work performance, supporting documentation such as payslips, and other reference letters. Furthermore, while Mr Scorer's representative argued that transitional provisions preserved the nomination's validity during the review process, the Tribunal's focus remained on the applicant's failure to demonstrate the requisite skills and experience for the nominated occupation.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. It concluded that Mr Scorer had not provided information and evidence that could reasonably satisfy the inquiry as to his skill level and experience, and therefore did not possess the necessary skills and experience to perform the nominated occupation of Chef.