Tasman Funds Management Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning a migration decision. The applicant, Tasman Funds Management Pty Ltd, sought to have a nomination for a position approved. The core dispute revolved around whether the company met the requirements for the Direct Entry nomination stream under regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant had demonstrated the financial capacity to employ the nominated individual in the proposed role for at least two years, and secondly, whether the applicant had met the specified training requirements for Australian citizens and permanent residents under regulation 5.19(4)(h).

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal found significant discrepancies in the financial documentation provided by the applicant, including multiple versions of profit and loss statements for the same financial periods with vastly different income and expense figures. This lack of reliable financial information led the Tribunal to be unsatisfied that the applicant possessed the capacity to cover the nominated employee's wages and superannuation for the required two-year period. Furthermore, regarding the training requirements, the Tribunal found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate expenditure equivalent to at least 1% of its payroll on training for Australian citizens and permanent residents, as required by training benchmark B. The Tribunal noted that even when attempting to calculate payroll by including consultant fees, the documented training expenditure fell short of the required threshold.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination, finding that the applicant had not met the requirements of regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994.