When a skills in demand visa decision is refused or cancelled, the applicant can ask the tribunal to review it. Our pipeline holds 252 such decisions (2023 to 2026), covering the employer-sponsored temporary skilled work visa (formerly the TSS 482). Here is what actually happened in them, straight from the published record.
These figures describe decisions that have already been made. Every case turns on its own facts and evidence, so they are a picture of the past, not a prediction. This is general information, not migration advice.
How to read these decisions
The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) reviews decisions made by the Department of Home Affairs. Until 14 October 2024 it was called the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). When someone is refused a visa or has one cancelled, they can often ask the tribunal to look at the decision again.
- Upheld / Affirmed
- The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stands (the applicant lost).
- Set aside
- The tribunal disagreed with the original decision and replaced it (the applicant won).
- Remitted
- The case was sent back to Home Affairs to decide again, with directions (a fresh chance for the applicant).
- Overturned
- The original decision was reversed. On these pages we group overturned decisions under "Set aside" above.
Citations follow a simple pattern: [2026] ARTA 315 means decision number 315 of the tribunal in 2026. Older decisions use AAT in place of ARTA.
What the tribunal decided
Across these 252 decisions, the tribunal confirmed the original decision 32% of the time, set it aside 17% of the time, and remitted it for reconsideration 51% of the time.
| Outcome | Decisions | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Remitted | 129 | 51.2% |
| Upheld | 63 | 25.0% |
| Set aside | 42 | 16.7% |
| Affirmed | 18 | 7.1% |
Counts from 252 decisions captured by our pipeline, as at 2026-09-27. Outcome is the result recorded in each decision.
Decisions by year
How many decisions our pipeline holds for each year, and how often the original decision was set aside that year.
| Year | Decisions | Set aside |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 78 | 1% |
| 2025 | 18 | 0% |
| 2024 | 155 | 26% |
| 2023 | 1 | 100% |
Most-cited legislation and rules
The provisions of the Migration Act and Regulations cited most often across the 61 decisions on this topic that record their citations. The number is how many of those decisions cite it.
Recent decisions
The 40 most recent decisions on this topic. Select a decision to read the full stored case story: the situation, the question before the tribunal, and what the tribunal established, straight from the record.
[2026] ARTA 21292026-09-03RemittedThe original decision refused to approve the nomination because the delegate was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine and that the nominee would perform…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Gobind Pty. Ltd., sought approval for a nomination for a Chef position for a Subclass 482 visa.
The question before the tribunal
The original decision refused to approve the nomination because the delegate was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine and that the nominee would perform the role full-time, aligning with ANZSCO requirements.
What the tribunal established
A nominated position must be genuine and full-time, with the majority of tasks aligning with the nominated occupation's ANZSCO description.
[2026] ARTA 21222026-08-31RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the applicant did not meet regulation 2.72(10)(a), which requires the nominated position to be genuine.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Local Roots and Food Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination for a Subclass 482 visa (Core Skills stream) for the occupation of Chef.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the applicant did not meet regulation 2.72(10)(a), which requires the nominated position to be genuine.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must approve a nomination if the applicant is an approved work sponsor and meets the requirements in reg 2.72, including that the position is genuine and full-time.
[2026] ARTA 21312026-08-25RemittedThe Department refused the nomination on the basis that the position was not genuine, citing concerns that the nominee's status as a shareholder indicated the…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, a restaurant business owner, sought approval for a nomination of a café/restaurant manager position for a Subclass 482 visa in the short-term stream.
The question before the tribunal
The Department refused the nomination on the basis that the position was not genuine, citing concerns that the nominee's status as a shareholder indicated the application was to facilitate stay rather than fill a genuine vacancy.
What the tribunal established
A nominated position is genuine if it exists independently of the nominee and aligns with the occupation's duties, even if the nominee is a shareholder, provided there is evidence of business need and operational structure.
[2026] ARTA 21182026-08-21RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination, being unsatisfied that the nominated position was genuine and that the company had the financial capacity to support the…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, ET Electrical Group Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination of an occupation for a Subclass 482 visa for an Electronic Equipment Trades Worker.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination, being unsatisfied that the nominated position was genuine and that the company had the financial capacity to support the role.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must assess whether the nominated position is genuine and full-time, and whether the company has the financial capacity to support the role.
[2026] ARTA 19042026-08-20RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied clause 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations by having at least two years work experience in the nominated occupation.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Marcio Xavier Maia Filho, sought a Subclass 482 Temporary Skill Shortage visa in the medium‑term stream as an Electronic Equipment Trades Worker.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied clause 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations by having at least two years work experience in the nominated occupation.
What the tribunal established
Clause 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations requires the applicant to have worked in the nominated occupation or a related field for at least two years.
[2026] ARTA 21232026-08-20RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination, finding the nominated position's duties were not commensurate with the ANZSCO description of an Accountant (General)…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Boltz Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nominated position of Accountant (General) for a Subclass 482 visa for Ms. Samphear Phann.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination, finding the nominated position's duties were not commensurate with the ANZSCO description of an Accountant (General), leaning more towards financial management.
What the tribunal established
A nominated position is genuine if its duties substantially align with the ANZSCO description and reflect a genuine need in the applicant's business.
[2026] ARTA 20002026-08-18RemittedWhether the nominated chef position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) for a Subclass 482 medium‑term nomination.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Triven RDY Pty Ltd applied to nominate a chef for a Subclass 482 medium‑term visa, but the delegate refused on the basis that the position was not genuine.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated chef position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) for a Subclass 482 medium‑term nomination.
What the tribunal established
Regulation 2.72(10) requires that the position associated with a Subclass 482 nomination be genuine and full‑time, and the Tribunal must assess the evidence qualitatively against the occupation’s ANZSCO tasks.
[2026] ARTA 21212026-08-14RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination because the applicant's business, Mr Chu Café, was considered a limited-service restaurant, failing to meet the criteria…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Sabahlpcc Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination for a Subclass 482 visa for the occupation of Chef (Medium-term stream).
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination because the applicant's business, Mr Chu Café, was considered a limited-service restaurant, failing to meet the criteria in reg 2.72(8).
What the tribunal established
A business operating within a shopping centre or labelled as a 'café' is not automatically a limited-service restaurant if it functions as a full-service establishment with table service, a diverse menu, and appropriate staffing.
[2026] ARTA 21202026-08-13RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination, finding that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence that the nominated position was genuine, particularly…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, S & S Kindergarten Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination for a Child Care Worker position for a Subclass 482 visa for Mrs. Ekta Shrestha.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination, finding that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence that the nominated position was genuine, particularly regarding the business's operational structure and the justification for the position.
What the tribunal established
A nominated position is genuine if the tasks and duties performed by the nominee align with the nominated occupation and the employer's operational needs.
[2026] ARTA 20842026-08-12AffirmedThe dispute concerned whether the applicant had failed to comply with section 101(b) of the Migration Act 1958 by providing false or misleading information regarding her…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant's Subclass 482 visa was cancelled due to providing incorrect information about her and her family's identities and previous visa histories on multiple visa applications.
The question before the tribunal
The dispute concerned whether the applicant had failed to comply with section 101(b) of the Migration Act 1958 by providing false or misleading information regarding her identity, aliases, previous visa applications, and family details across several visa applications.
What the tribunal established
A visa can be cancelled under s 109 of the Migration Act 1958 if the visa holder fails to provide correct information in their visa applications.
[2026] ARTA 19962026-08-11AffirmedWhether the nominated chef position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of regulation 2.72(10).
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mezcals Pty Ltd, operating Mexican food restaurants in Cooma and Canberra, sought approval to nominate a chef for a Subclass 482 visa but the Canberra venue had closed and the nominee was no longer employed.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated chef position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of regulation 2.72(10).
What the tribunal established
Regulation 2.72(10) requires that the position associated with a Subclass 482 nomination be genuine and a full‑time position at the date of the decision.
[2026] ARTA 21382026-08-11RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the nominee would not be engaged solely as an employee under a written contract, as required by…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Roger Tennis Club Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination for a Subclass 482 visa in the Core Skills stream for the occupation of Sports Development Officer.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the nominee would not be engaged solely as an employee under a written contract, as required by regulation 2.72(11)(d).
What the tribunal established
For a nomination to be approved for a Subclass 482 visa in the Core Skills stream, the nominee must be engaged solely as an employee under a written contract of employment by the nominator or an associated entity.
[2026] ARTA 19132026-08-07RemittedWhether the applicant gave or caused a bogus document to be provided, thereby breaching Public Interest Criterion 4020 for a Subclass 485 visa.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant was refused a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa because the Department alleged he submitted bogus education documents in a prior student visa application.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant gave or caused a bogus document to be provided, thereby breaching Public Interest Criterion 4020 for a Subclass 485 visa.
What the tribunal established
Under PIC 4020(1) of the Migration Regulations an applicant must not give or cause a bogus document or false information to be provided, but the provision is not breached where the applicant did not knowingly provide or cause the document and was not recklessly indifferent.
[2026] ARTA 19712026-07-28AffirmedWhether the nominated Corporate General Manager position satisfies reg 2.72(10)(a) and is a genuine position aligned with the nominated occupation.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
International Aviation Alliance Pty Ltd, an Australian aviation business, nominated a Chinese national as General Manager under the Subclass 482 visa, but the delegate refused the nomination alleging the position was not genuine, leading to a review.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated Corporate General Manager position satisfies reg 2.72(10)(a) and is a genuine position aligned with the nominated occupation.
What the tribunal established
Under s 140GB of the Migration Act and reg 2.72(10)(a) the Minister must be satisfied that the nominated position is genuine and aligns with the ANZSCO occupation.
[2026] ARTA 19732026-07-28RemittedWhether Simpson breached PIC 4020 by providing false or misleading information about his spent convictions and whether a waiver was justified.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Dean Simpson, a British welder, applied for a Subclass 482 TSS visa but was refused because he did not disclose several UK convictions.
The question before the tribunal
Whether Simpson breached PIC 4020 by providing false or misleading information about his spent convictions and whether a waiver was justified.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and cl 482.217(1) of Schedule 2, an applicant must not supply false or misleading information, but a waiver may be granted under PIC 4020(4) if compelling compassionate circumstances exist.
[2026] ARTA 19792026-07-23AffirmedWhether the applicant’s non‑compliance with s 101(b) and s 103, i.e., providing incorrect answers and bogus documents, justified cancellation of his visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Daniel Reindorf, holder of a Subclass 482 Temporary Skill Shortage visa, provided false employment information and bogus documents in his visa application.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant’s non‑compliance with s 101(b) and s 103, i.e., providing incorrect answers and bogus documents, justified cancellation of his visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 109(1) of the Migration Act, a visa may be cancelled if the holder fails to comply with s 101(b) or s 103, provided a valid s 107 notice is given.
[2026] ARTA 19582026-07-20RemittedWhether the nominated position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) for the Subclass 482 nomination.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Golden Wattle Retail Pty Ltd applied to nominate a Retail Manager (General) for a Subclass 482 visa but the delegate refused on the basis that the position was not genuine.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated position satisfied the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) for the Subclass 482 nomination.
What the tribunal established
Under reg 2.72(10) the nominated position must be genuine and full‑time, and the Tribunal may assess the tasks against the ANZSCO description to determine genuineness.
[2026] ARTA 13162026-07-16Set asideThe applicant was found to have engaged in conduct that was not professional, competent, or ethical, including providing false or misleading information and failing to…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a registered migration agent, had their registration cancelled by the Migration Agents Registration Authority due to breaches of the Code of Conduct.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant was found to have engaged in conduct that was not professional, competent, or ethical, including providing false or misleading information and failing to maintain proper client files.
What the tribunal established
A migration agent must act professionally, competently, and with integrity.
[2026] ARTA 14242026-07-15RemittedThe Minister was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, NTA Hospitality Pty Ltd, had their nomination for an Accommodation and Hospitality Manager under the Subclass 482 visa refused by the Minister.
The question before the tribunal
The Minister was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time.
[2026] ARTA 14262026-07-09RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had a genuine need for a full-time diesel motor mechanic, and the applicant sought review of this decision.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Ghossayn Group Pty Ltd, had their nomination for a diesel motor mechanic under the Subclass 482 visa refused due to the delegate's finding that the position was not genuine.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had a genuine need for a full-time diesel motor mechanic, and the applicant sought review of this decision.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with a nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time, as required by reg 2.72(10) of the Migration Regulations 1994.
[2026] ARTA 13712026-07-01RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had the necessary skills, qualifications, and employment background to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, a Sales and Marketing Manager, had his Temporary Skill Shortage visa application refused due to concerns about his skills and experience.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had the necessary skills, qualifications, and employment background to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation.
What the tribunal established
The applicant must have the skills, qualifications, and employment background necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation.
[2026] ARTA 13452026-06-30RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the position was genuine, as the tasks of the position were considered more closely aligned with those of a Sales Representative…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Hally Labels Pty Limited, had its nomination for a Technical Sales Representative under the Subclass 482 visa refused by a delegate of the Minister.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the position was genuine, as the tasks of the position were considered more closely aligned with those of a Sales Representative (Business Services) ANZSCO 611312.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time, unless it is reasonable to disregard this requirement.
[2026] ARTA 12112026-06-18AffirmedThe applicant's educational qualifications and certificates were found to be non-genuine as they were issued without the applicant completing the required training and…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant's Subclass 482 visa was cancelled due to the provision of incorrect information and bogus documents in their visa application.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant's educational qualifications and certificates were found to be non-genuine as they were issued without the applicant completing the required training and assessment.
What the tribunal established
The Minister has the power to cancel a visa under s 109 of the Migration Act 1958 if the visa holder has failed to comply with certain sections of the Act.
[2026] ARTA 12092026-06-11RemittedThe delegate considered whether it was reasonable to disregard the requirement in reg 2.72(15)(d) of the Regulations, given that the Company's calculation of the annual…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, BH01 Pty Ltd, applied for approval of a nomination for an Indian national, Karamjit Singh, to work as a Chef in the Medium-term stream, but the delegate refused the nomination due to the Company's failure to meet the criterion in reg 2.72(15) of the Regulations.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate considered whether it was reasonable to disregard the requirement in reg 2.72(15)(d) of the Regulations, given that the Company's calculation of the annual market salary rate was less than the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must consider whether the Company has met the requirements of reg 2.72(15) of the Regulations, including determining the annual market salary rate by reference to relevant employment documents.
[2026] ARTA 11982026-06-09AffirmedWhether the applicants satisfied the approved‑nomination requirement under cl 482.212 of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Ms Yoon, a South Korean hairdresser, and her de‑facto partner applied for Subclass 482 visas but the sponsor’s nomination was not approved.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicants satisfied the approved‑nomination requirement under cl 482.212 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A Subclass 482 visa can only be granted if the nomination identified in the application has been approved, was made by an approved sponsor and the approval has not ceased (cl 482.212(1) Schedule 2 Regulations).
[2026] ARTA 21022026-06-05RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the nominated position was not genuine, specifically that the applicant did not satisfy reg 2.72(10).
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant sought approval for a nominated occupation for a Subclass 482 visa, Short-term stream, for a Production Manager (Manufacturing) position.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination on the basis that the nominated position was not genuine, specifically that the applicant did not satisfy reg 2.72(10).
What the tribunal established
A nominated position must be genuine and full-time, requiring a qualitative assessment of the position against the nominated occupation.
[2026] ARTA 18552026-06-04RemittedWhether the applicant’s business meets reg 2.72(8)(b) by not being a limited‑service restaurant, affecting approval of the nomination.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Union Electric Pty Ltd, an Australian hospitality company, sought a subclass 482 short‑term nomination for a Food and Beverage Manager, contested on whether its venues constitute a limited‑service restaurant.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant’s business meets reg 2.72(8)(b) by not being a limited‑service restaurant, affecting approval of the nomination.
What the tribunal established
Under Migration Regulation 2.72(8), a nomination for a subclass 482 short‑term Café or Restaurant Manager must not be for a position in a limited‑service restaurant as defined in the instrument; if the business provides more than limited food service, the criterion is satisfied.
[2026] ARTA 10852026-06-03RemittedThe delegate refused the visa application due to the applicant not meeting the requirements of cl 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically not working in…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Bremen Navarro Sanchez, applied for a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa under the Medium-term stream to work as a Fibrous Plasterer.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the visa application due to the applicant not meeting the requirements of cl 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically not working in the nominated occupation or a related field for at least 2 years.
What the tribunal established
The applicant must meet the requirements of cl 482.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations to be eligible for a Subclass 482 visa.
[2026] ARTA 10862026-06-03RemittedThe delegate refused to approve the nomination, citing concerns that the position was not genuine and that the applicant had not provided sufficient information about…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Future Fields Pty Ltd, operates a dairy farm and food processing facility in Western Australia and sought to nominate a migrant worker, Mr Nater, as a Chemical Engineer under the Subclass 482 visa program.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to approve the nomination, citing concerns that the position was not genuine and that the applicant had not provided sufficient information about the business context.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time.
[2026] ARTA 10982026-05-28RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
To Do Automotive Pty Ltd's nomination for a Motor Mechanic under the Subclass 482 visa was refused due to concerns about the genuineness of the position.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time.
[2026] ARTA 10922026-05-25AffirmedThe issue in dispute was whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically whether the position associated with the nominated…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, Ausie Almond Farms Pty Ltd, nominated Mr Singh for a Subclass 482 visa in the occupation of Nut Grower, but the delegate refused the nomination due to concerns about the genuineness of the position.
The question before the tribunal
The issue in dispute was whether the applicant met the criteria for approval of the nomination, specifically whether the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine.
What the tribunal established
The labour market testing condition requires a person nominating an occupation to test the Australian labour market to demonstrate whether a suitably qualified and experienced Australian citizen or permanent resident is readily available to fill the position.
[2026] ARTA 18402026-05-25RemittedWhether the nominated position satisfies reg 2.72(8) by demonstrating the business is not a limited‑service restaurant.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Red Coral Management Pty Ltd applied to nominate a Duty Manager for a Subclass 482 short‑term visa, but the delegate refused on the basis that the business was a limited‑service restaurant.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated position satisfies reg 2.72(8) by demonstrating the business is not a limited‑service restaurant.
What the tribunal established
Under s 140GB(2) of the Migration Act and reg 2.72(8) of the Migration Regulations, a nomination must show the occupation is not in a limited‑service restaurant and the position is genuine.
[2026] ARTA 9692026-05-18RemittedThe delegate refused the nomination on the basis that the nominated occupation was not genuine and the position was not full‑time.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Mairaa Pty Ltd nominated Indian hairdresser Suraj Bhujel for a Subclass 482 visa in the Core Skills stream to work at its new Strathfield salon.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the nomination on the basis that the nominated occupation was not genuine and the position was not full‑time.
What the tribunal established
Regulation 2.72(10) requires the nominated position to be genuine and full‑time, and the Tribunal must assess the duties against the ANZSCO description to determine genuineness.
[2026] ARTA 18592026-05-14AffirmedWhether the nominated ICT Support Engineer position met the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72 and the sponsor complied with obligations under reg 2.86…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Twinoz Pty Ltd sought a subclass 482 nomination for Ms Chen as an ICT Support Engineer but the nomination was refused due to concerns the position was not genuine, not full‑time, and sponsor obligations were breached.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated ICT Support Engineer position met the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72 and the sponsor complied with obligations under reg 2.86 regarding associated entities.
What the tribunal established
A nomination must satisfy reg 2.72(10) that the position is genuine and full‑time and reg 2.86 that the sponsor ensures the nominee works only for the sponsor or an associated entity as defined in the Corporations Act.
[2026] ARTA 8682026-05-05RemittedThe Minister was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine, as the tasks to be performed by the nominee did not align…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, ABF Express Pty Ltd, had their nomination for a Transport Company Manager under the Subclass 482 visa refused by the Minister, which was then reviewed by the Tribunal.
The question before the tribunal
The Minister was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation was genuine, as the tasks to be performed by the nominee did not align substantially with the tasks of the nominated occupation.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time, unless it is reasonable to disregard this requirement.
[2026] ARTA 9712026-05-05RemittedWhether the primary applicant satisfied the nomination approval requirement under cl 482.212(1) and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the third applicant’s…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The primary applicant and his partner applied for subclass 482 visas, the employer's nomination was later approved, and the Tribunal set aside the refusals and remitted the applications for reconsideration.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the primary applicant satisfied the nomination approval requirement under cl 482.212(1) and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the third applicant’s decision.
What the tribunal established
Clause 482.212(1) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations requires an approved nomination made by an approved sponsor that has not ceased for a subclass 482 visa.
[2026] ARTA 12772026-04-16AffirmedThe applicant's business was not yet operational at the time of nomination, and there was insufficient evidence to support the finding that the business is currently…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, Tradi F & B Pty Ltd, had their nomination application for a Subclass 482 visa refused due to insufficient evidence that the position was genuine.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant's business was not yet operational at the time of nomination, and there was insufficient evidence to support the finding that the business is currently operating or that the nominated position is genuine and continues to be required.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine, as required by reg 2.72(10)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994.
[2026] ARTA 12792026-04-15RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of reg 2.72(15) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically regarding the annual market salary…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Bassendean Wellness Clinic Pty Ltd, nominated a position of Chef for a Subclass 482 visa in the Medium-term stream, but the delegate refused the nomination due to concerns about the annual earnings of the nominee.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of reg 2.72(15) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically regarding the annual market salary rate for the occupation.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must consider whether the applicant meets the criteria for approval of nomination under reg 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994.
[2026] ARTA 8132026-04-14RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation of Conference and Events Organiser was genuine.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, XTRA ORDINARY EVENTS PTY LTD, sought review of a decision to refuse approval of a nomination for a Subclass 482 visa for an Events Manager position.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate was not satisfied that the position associated with the nominated occupation of Conference and Events Organiser was genuine.
What the tribunal established
The position associated with the nominated occupation must be genuine and full-time.
[2026] ARTA 9012026-04-14RemittedWhether the nominated accountant position satisfies the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Art Cleaning and Maintenance Services Pty Ltd nominated an Indian accountant for a Subclass 482 visa and the delegate refused on the basis that the position was not genuine.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the nominated accountant position satisfies the genuine and full‑time requirements of reg 2.72(10) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
The position must be genuine and full‑time under reg 2.72(10) of the Migration Regulations, assessed by comparing the actual duties with the ANZSCO occupation description.
Track visa decisions as they land
Our pipeline reads new tribunal decisions from the official record every week and folds them into the numbers on these pages. Subscribers get the important rule and outcome shifts in plain English. Free, unsubscribe anytime.
Where do you actually stand?
Tribunal outcomes show how the rules are applied, but your own position depends on your visa, your points and your evidence.