TRIPLE ONE GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (Migration)
Case
•
[2022] AATA 895
•31 March 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
TRIPLE ONE GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (Migration) [2022] AATA 895
[2022] AATA 895
31 March 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by TRIPLE ONE GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD for approval of an employer nomination for the occupation of Marketing Specialist under the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The applicant, a real estate agency operating in Sydney CBD, had lodged the application on 6 June 2017, sponsoring Ms Ruoming Tong, who held a Subclass 457 Visa. The case came before the Tribunal for review of a decision concerning the applicant's compliance with the requirements for nomination approval.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of the employer nomination. This involved assessing whether the application was compliant, whether the nominated occupation matched the nominee's previous visa occupation, and whether the nominator satisfied various criteria relating to its business operations, sponsorship history, and employment conditions for the nominee.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had satisfied the procedural requirements of the application, including its form, fee, and certification. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nominated occupation of Marketing Specialist (ANZSCO 225113) was the same as that held by the nominee on her Subclass 457 Visa, based on evidence including employment contracts and departmental records. Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the applicant met the criteria of being actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, and that the nominee had been employed in the nominated position full-time for at least two years. The Tribunal also found that the terms and conditions of employment were no less favourable than those provided to Australian citizens or permanent residents performing equivalent work.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous decision and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of the employer nomination. This involved assessing whether the application was compliant, whether the nominated occupation matched the nominee's previous visa occupation, and whether the nominator satisfied various criteria relating to its business operations, sponsorship history, and employment conditions for the nominee.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had satisfied the procedural requirements of the application, including its form, fee, and certification. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nominated occupation of Marketing Specialist (ANZSCO 225113) was the same as that held by the nominee on her Subclass 457 Visa, based on evidence including employment contracts and departmental records. Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the applicant met the criteria of being actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, and that the nominee had been employed in the nominated position full-time for at least two years. The Tribunal also found that the terms and conditions of employment were no less favourable than those provided to Australian citizens or permanent residents performing equivalent work.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous 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
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
K & L Endo Medical Pty Ltd (Migration) [2022] AATA 2989
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0