//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2024] AATA 697
appellant. The applications were remitted to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the first named applicant and secondary applicants meet criteria in cls 482.212 and 482.312; the Minister...
The Tribunal accepted that the applicant's ICT Business Analyst role was genuine and that he genuinely intended to perform it. It also relied on a separate Tribunal decision approving the employer's nomination, so it found the approved-sponsor criterion met. It treated the two other applicants as family-unit applicants who met the specified secondary criterion. The Tribunal did not decide whether every requirement for the visas was satisfied. Instead, it returned the applications to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria.
AI-generated legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Check the cited source, and for advice about your situation consult a qualified Australian lawyer.
2,052 words · generated 29/09/2026
Pradhan (Migration) [2024] AATA 697 concerns three applications for Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas: Mr Suraj Pradhan as the primary applicant, and Mrs Nilam Shrestha and Miss Luniva Pradhan as secondary applicants. The primary applicant sought a Subclass 482 visa in the Medium-term stream to work for Calibre Furniture Pty Ltd in the nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst, ANZSCO Code 261111. The decision identifies the relevant provisions as cls 482.212 and 482.312 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.
No linked legislation citations have been extracted yet.
The applicants lodged their applications on 3 February 2020. A delegate refused them on 8 September 2021 under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958. The stated reason was that the primary applicant did not satisfy cl 482.212 because he was not subject to an approved standard business sponsor (Reasons, “Application for Review”, [1]–[3]).
The Tribunal heard the applicants on 10 January 2024 and also heard evidence from Mr Bill Huynh, Calibre Furniture's Managing Director. The principal issue it identified was whether the primary applicant had an approved standard business sponsor for the nominated occupation (Reasons, “Consideration of Claims and Evidence”, [1]).
The sponsor's evidence described Calibre Furniture as an eCommerce furniture business employing approximately 28 people. It included evidence about recruitment, the organisation chart, the applicant's employment contracts and salary, and the business need for the role. The applicant had studied information management and information technology management, and had been employed by Calibre Furniture since December 2018. The sponsor gave a detailed account of the applicant's work, including requirements analysis, ERP and workflow development, data and sales analysis, systems implementation, and training.
The Tribunal found that the genuine-intention and genuine-position requirements in cl 482.212(2) were met. For the approved-sponsor issue, it relied on a separate Tribunal decision in Case Matter 2110253 that had approved the nomination. It also found that the secondary applicants met cl 482.312 as members of the family unit. The Tribunal remitted the applications so the Minister could consider the remaining visa criteria (Reasons, “Decision”, [1]).
The decision is a Tribunal review decision, not a court judgment. Its reasoning is focused on two linked matters: whether the nominated position and the applicant's intention to perform it were genuine, and whether the sponsorship requirement was met.
On genuineness, cl 482.212(2) is described as requiring both a genuine intention to perform the nominated occupation and a genuine position associated with that occupation (Reasons, “Genuine position and intention to perform occupation”, [1]). The Tribunal's conclusion followed its assessment of evidence about the actual role and the sponsor's business.
The sponsor described the position as an existing, important role, explaining that an ICT Business Analyst analysed business processes and systems, documented requirements, developed plans, and supported business decision-making. The sponsor also said the role was needed for the company's operations and growth. The Tribunal had evidence of advertising and a large number of applications, along with the sponsor's account of interviewing the applicant and selecting him. These matters formed part of the evidence relevant to whether the position was genuine.
The job description was extensive and tied the applicant's work to Calibre Furniture's business systems and activities. It covered stakeholder consultation, business and functional requirements documents, automated workflows in NetSuite and Shopify, website and sales analysis, inventory management, integrations with online marketplaces, ERP implementation, and staff training. The Tribunal concluded that cl 482.212(2) was met (Reasons, “Evidence of Mr Bill Huynh” and following findings, [18] and [3]). The repeated paragraph numbering in the published reasons means section headings are important when locating these references.
The sponsorship question depended on a related review. The Tribunal stated that, in Case Matter 2110253, it had made a substitute decision approving the nomination. On that basis, it found that the applicant was subject to an approved standard business sponsor for the nominated ICT Business Analyst occupation (Reasons, findings following the sponsor evidence, [4]). This is central to the decision: the Tribunal did not simply infer sponsor approval from the employer's general business evidence. It expressly relied on the outcome of the associated nomination matter.
For the secondary applicants, the Tribunal reasoned that, once the primary applicant had met the relevant criteria, the secondary applicants as members of the family unit met the required criterion under cl 482.312 (Reasons, findings following the sponsor evidence, [5]). The decision does not provide a separate, detailed examination of each secondary applicant's circumstances.
Finally, the Tribunal did not decide that the applicants met every criterion for the visas. It said the appropriate course was to remit the matters for the Minister to consider the remaining criteria. The grant of subclass 186 visas to the applicants on 15 December 2023 was noted, but the decision does not say that this resolved the remaining Subclass 482 criteria (Reasons, findings following the sponsor evidence, [6]–[7]).
This decision does not purport to change the law or establish a general new rule. It applies the criteria identified in cls 482.212 and 482.312 to the particular evidence before the Tribunal. The legal framework it states is limited: primary applicants must meet the relevant criteria for their chosen stream, while members of the family unit applying as secondary applicants must meet secondary criteria. The decision identifies the genuine-intention and genuine-position requirements in cl 482.212(2), and treats the approved standard business sponsor requirement as an issue under cl 482.212.
Before the review, the delegate had refused the applications because the primary applicant was not considered to be subject to an approved standard business sponsor. At the Tribunal review stage, the nomination matter had resulted in a substitute decision approving the nomination. The Tribunal relied on that separate decision to find the sponsorship requirement satisfied. It then directed that the applicants be taken to meet the identified criteria and remitted the applications for consideration of what remained.
The decision should therefore be read narrowly. It demonstrates how the Tribunal connected the outcome of a sponsor nomination review with the visa applicant's sponsor-related criterion in this case. It does not set out the full legal test for approving a nomination, and it does not analyse the full content of every criterion for a Subclass 482 visa. Nor does it decide that all remaining visa requirements were met. The governing legislation cited in the decision is s 65 of the Migration Act and Schedule 2, cls 482.212 and 482.312 of the Regulations.
The published material supplied here does not establish a broader “before and after” change in doctrine. No general rule should be inferred about every ICT Business Analyst role, every employer in eCommerce, or every nomination that is approved in a related proceeding. The outcome is tied to the evidence and the associated nomination decision in this matter.
The Tribunal stated that cl 482.212(2) requires a genuine intention to perform the nominated occupation and a genuine position. It then concluded: “For these reasons the requirements of cl 482.212(2) are met” (Reasons, “Genuine position and intention to perform occupation”, [1]; findings following sponsor evidence, [3]). In plain English, it accepted that the job was real and that the applicant genuinely intended to do that work.
The Tribunal's central statement on sponsorship was that, based on its decision in Case Matter 2110253 approving the nomination, the applicant was subject to an approved standard business sponsor for the nominated occupation (Reasons, findings following sponsor evidence, [4]). Put simply, the Tribunal relied on the separate nomination decision rather than deciding the nomination issue in isolation in this visa review.
On the family applicants, the Tribunal said that because the primary applicant met the relevant requirements, it followed that the secondary applicants, as members of a family unit, met the required criteria for a Subclass 482 visa (Reasons, findings following sponsor evidence, [5]). This is the Tribunal's stated reasoning for cl 482.312. The decision does not set out a separate factual analysis of each family applicant.
The Tribunal also explained the limit of its decision: “Given these findings, the appropriate course is to remit the matter to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa” (Reasons, findings following sponsor evidence, [7]). In plain English, the Tribunal decided some identified requirements but left the other visa requirements for the Minister to assess.
The decision is most relevant to a fact pattern with a closely related structure: an employer has nominated a worker for a Subclass 482 visa, the visa application has been refused because of the approved-sponsor or nomination issue, and a Tribunal review of the nomination has resulted in a decision approving it. In Pradhan, the Tribunal expressly relied on the separate nomination decision in Case Matter 2110253.
It may also be relevant where the dispute concerns whether a nominated skilled position is genuine and whether the applicant genuinely intends to perform it. In this case, the evidence included a detailed job description, the applicant's education and employment history, contracts and salary information, recruitment material, a business organisation chart, and evidence about the employer's operations and staffing.
The particular occupation and industry context matter to the factual comparison. The nominated occupation was ICT Business Analyst in a furniture eCommerce business. The described duties included analysing sales and stock data, working with business platforms, developing workflows, supporting ERP implementation, and coordinating with internal and external stakeholders. The decision does not establish that duties with different substance or a different employer context would be assessed the same way.
The case also addresses secondary applicants said to be members of the primary applicant's family unit. Its relevance is limited by the Tribunal's brief treatment of that issue: it concluded that cl 482.312 was met because the primary applicant had met the relevant criteria, but did not explain in detail the evidence about each secondary applicant.
The supplied judgment contains no discussion of later court or Tribunal treatment of Pradhan, and the materials provided do not establish whether it has been followed, distinguished, or otherwise considered in later decisions. It would therefore be unsupported to state that later courts have adopted its reasoning as a general rule.
The decision itself refers to Case Matter 2110253, a separate Tribunal proceeding about the sponsor's nomination. That reference is not a later treatment of Pradhan. It is part of the reasoning used in Pradhan to find the applicant subject to an approved standard business sponsor.
The decision also gives no citation to an appellate court judgment that reviews or endorses its reasoning. Its practical significance must be described from its own terms: it records a Tribunal finding on the evidence and a remittal, rather than an appellate ruling about the meaning of the visa provisions. Any account of later treatment would require sources beyond this decision.
The Tribunal did not determine whether the applicants met all the remaining Subclass 482 criteria. Those matters were expressly left for the Minister after remittal. The decision therefore cannot be read as a final determination that the visas had to be granted.
The reasons do not reproduce or analyse the complete text of all relevant regulatory criteria. They identify cls 482.212 and 482.312 and explain the genuineness requirements in cl 482.212(2), but provide limited discussion of the detailed operation of the other criteria. A fuller legal analysis of any particular application would need the applicable legislative text and relevant evidence, neither of which is fully analysed in this decision.
The reasoning for the secondary applicants is also brief. The Tribunal's conclusion is recorded, but the decision does not explain the underlying evidence about their family-unit status or address possible individual circumstances separately. Likewise, the decision does not detail the reasoning in Case Matter 2110253 beyond saying that the nomination was approved by a substitute decision.
Finally, the decision notes the applicants' subclass 186 grants in December 2023, but does not explain their effect on the pending Subclass 482 applications or on the remaining criteria. It would be speculative to attribute a particular legal consequence to that fact from this judgment alone.
This is general legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Before acting on this, relying on it, or using any draft, have it checked by a qualified Australian lawyer.
Pradhan (Migration) [2024] AATA 697 (5 February 2024)
REPRESENTATIVE: Mr Sanji Caldera (MARN: 0635492)
DECISION: The Tribunal remits the applications for Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant and secondary applicants meet the following criteria for a Subclass 482 visa:
MIGRATION - Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa - Subclass 482 - Medium-term stream - ICT Business Analyst - position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine - applicant is subject to an approved standard business sponsor - members of a family unit - Tribunal set aside the Department's decision and substituted a decision that the nomination be approved - decision under review remitted
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 482.212, 482.312
Genuine position and intention to perform occupation
Evidence of Mr Bill Huynh, the Managing Director of Calibre Furniture Pty Ltd.
"Collaboration with key stakeholders such as the sales and marketing teams, warehouse, suppliers, and logistics company, actively engage in the process of gathering requirements, facilitating design discussions, troubleshooting issues, and rigorously testing features to ensure alignment with evolving business needs. As a critical part of this role, develop comprehensive business requirements documents (BRDs) and functional requirement documents (FRDs), often supplemented with use cases, to effectively convey intricate business requirements to both management and stakeholders. Furthermore, utilize expertise to establish automated workflows within platforms like NetSuite and Shopify, streamlining functional processes to enhance operational efficiency. Example of some workflows created "New Arrival Removed for Out of stock items" and "New Item Getting default setting"
Conducting comprehensive analyses of customer behaviour, sales trends, and website traffic through Google Analytics, leading to successful enhancements in UI and UX design to improve the customer experience and boost conversion rates. Use NetSuite for rigorous stock data analysis, optimizing website performance and driving sales growth. Additionally, monitoring reorder points and safety stock levels to ensure a balanced supply chain while minimizing holding costs. Collaborating with stakeholders, including Bill, focused on streamlining procurement processes for new orders and maintaining efficient inventory management, crucial for uninterrupted business support. For example, creating an order preparation file for each supplier in Google Sheets, integrating real-time stock data and purchase order history to inform data-driven restocking decisions, thus enhancing operational efficiency within the realm of ICT.
Utilizing Excel and Shopify backend sales reports to analyse products sale performance, identifying best-selling and underperforming products. Working together with marketing team to run better sales promotions and adding extra discount on those items that are underperforming. Also, gathering and recording customer and sales team feedback for product improvement. Identifying quality and design issues, working closely with suppliers to enhance existing and new products. Collaborating with web and app developers to address feedback and errors reported by the sales team, recommending cost-effective solutions. Using NetSuite for stock data analysis and monitoring to further enhance website performance and drive sales growth within the realm of ICT. Coordinating with warehouse, logistics partners, and suppliers, ensuring timely product deliveries, thereby optimizing the sales operations. Role extended to efficiently managing all essential customs documents from suppliers to facilitate seamless container customs clearance.
Proficiency in a diverse array of software and tools, including Shopify backend, Oracle NetSuite (ERP), MS Office with advanced Excel capabilities (such as VLOOKUPS, PIVOT TABLES, and FILTERS), MONDAY.com board, and Retail POS systems. These proficiencies equipped to conduct effective analyses and develop project plans, including cost estimation, resource allocation, and project management. The use of MONDAY.com facilitated the meticulous tracking and management of website-related issues, allowing us to update their status based on the implemented solutions. Use of NetSuite to create a report using save search, some of the search created are Calibre ETA for feed, Item Listing Tracking and many more. In addition, I managed product listings on the Shopify platform using HTML and workflows, ensuring the accuracy and timeliness of product information by collaborating with suppliers, warehouses, photographers, copywriters, and the backend team, to provide comprehensive and up-to-date product listings on the website.
Successful end-to-end implementation of the NetSuite ERP system, taking charge of tasks like data migration, process mapping, data analysis, and reporting, ensuring a seamless transition. Leveraging expertise in Marketplace integrations across platforms like Catch, Kogan, eBay, Amazon, Mydeal, Blockshop, and more, taking responsibility for proposing and executing innovative applications, such as CedCommerce Catch Integration to integrate Catch marketplace with Shopify and Marketplace Connect for eBay and Amazon connections. These initiatives aimed to enhance both system and business operations. Furthermore, I collaborated closely with developers to design and implement a cost-effective in-house Pre-order functional app, effectively replacing third-party applications like Amai PreOrder Manager, consequently eliminating monthly expenses. I also engaged in consultations with the Calibre team and app developers to conceptualize a budget-friendly replacement app for tiered pricing, specifically Bold Custom Pricing: Wholesale, enabling customized pricing structures based on customer type, thereby contributing to significant reductions in company operational costs.
Took on the responsibility of developing comprehensive training materials for NetSuite ERP and played a pivotal role in offering crucial support for team training, facilitating a smooth transition to the new system. Collaborative efforts extended to working with Ready Grad to establish an efficient platform for intern training, effectively utilizing trainual.com to create training materials and manuals for this purpose."
"ICT Business Analysts work with users to formulate the system requirements, develop system plans and documentation, reviewing and evaluating existing systems. It also involves the role to design and modify the systems to meet users' business needs.
The role of an ICT Business Analyst is a key role in the organisation who can analyse and document the current business processed and date, develop, manage and effective dashboard to streamline the business decision-making process, developing system development and marketing project plans and many other related duties. The role of an ICT Business Analyst is a key role in the development of the business. It is important to have skilled and experienced employees to manage this position as it directly affects future projects and the growth of the business.
The position was advertised on different platforms by a recruitment agent for a month. However, there were no suitable candidates that met the company's position requirements. Please refer attached LMT report.
The position of a ICT Business Analyst is an existing role in the organisation managed by the Nominee since last year. This role is a key role in the organisation, and we can see the major growth in the business and the effect of a skilled ICT Business Analyst directly impacting on the growth of the business. So, this role must be filled with a skilled worker with the necessary qualifications and skills to uphold this position. Therefore, the need for a full-time paid employee with the skills to fulfil the role is highly required.
The Nominee, Suraj has vast practical experience and skills related to the occupation, nominee is highly competent and skilled to continue in the position and at the same time keep a close eye and identify the flaws in the current systems.
The future operation and growth of Calibre Furniture relies upon the employment of a stable, skilled and enthusiastic ICT Business Analyst, who has a background/experience and someone who has managed a ICT Business Analyst role in the complex and multifaceted IT environments.
Considering the qualifications and the experience of the nominating sponsor, the nominee meets the
requirement and will be a valuable asset to maintain the overall operations of the business.
I believe that I have addressed all the requirements to prove our need to sponsor the Nominee for the position and if you need any further details, please do not hesitate to contact our Migration Agent ....."
The applications were remitted to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the first named applicant and secondary applicants meet criteria in cls 482.212 and 482.312; the Minister is to consider the remaining criteria.