Unique Education & Migration Services Pty Ltd (Migration)
Case
•
[2022] AATA 1055
•17 January 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Unique Education & Migration Services Pty Ltd (Migration) [2022] AATA 1055
[2022] AATA 1055
17 January 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by Unique Education & Migration Services Pty Ltd (the applicant) for review of a decision made under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant sought to nominate a position for a Student Counsellor, which was associated with the occupation of a Student Counsellor as defined by ANZSCO. The delegate had affirmed the decision that the nominated position was not genuine.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the nominated position of Student Counsellor, as performed by the nominee, was a genuine position that aligned with the requirements of the occupation as defined by ANZSCO. This involved an assessment of the duties performed by the nominee and whether they corresponded to the skill level and responsibilities typically associated with a Student Counsellor.
The court considered evidence presented by Ms Nandra, who stated that the nominee's role involved advising students on courses, career paths, and the job market in their home countries. The nominee also assisted with post-study work visa applications, developed action plans for students, helped with CVs and LinkedIn profiles, counselled on interview skills, and facilitated links with recruitment firms. Furthermore, the nominee addressed psychological issues faced by international students by developing a peer support program and assisted with language barriers. However, the court found that the nominee's initial work primarily involved admissions, and while the counselling role developed, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the position was genuine and aligned with the occupation of Student Counsellor as defined by ANZSCO, particularly in light of the nominee's prior experience in admissions.
The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the nominated position was not genuine.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the nominated position of Student Counsellor, as performed by the nominee, was a genuine position that aligned with the requirements of the occupation as defined by ANZSCO. This involved an assessment of the duties performed by the nominee and whether they corresponded to the skill level and responsibilities typically associated with a Student Counsellor.
The court considered evidence presented by Ms Nandra, who stated that the nominee's role involved advising students on courses, career paths, and the job market in their home countries. The nominee also assisted with post-study work visa applications, developed action plans for students, helped with CVs and LinkedIn profiles, counselled on interview skills, and facilitated links with recruitment firms. Furthermore, the nominee addressed psychological issues faced by international students by developing a peer support program and assisted with language barriers. However, the court found that the nominee's initial work primarily involved admissions, and while the counselling role developed, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the position was genuine and aligned with the occupation of Student Counsellor as defined by ANZSCO, particularly in light of the nominee's prior experience in admissions.
The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the nominated position was not genuine.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Natural Justice
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0