INZ declined the client’s residence application because it was no satisfied that her role as a store manager in a Motor Oil Service Station substantially matched the ANZSCO description and core tasks for the occupation of Retail Manager (General).

INZ’s primary concerns was that the store was part of the Motor oil franchise which had oversight for specific tasks. It also expressed concerns over another core tasks. 

On appeal, we submitted that INZ did not conduct a fair or holistic assessment of the application, as it failed to appreciate that the business was an independent dealership, not a franchise. INZ failed to correctly comprehend the nature of the business model in question, skewed INZ’s appreciation of all relevant evidence of the client’s employment. Further, we submitted that INZ did not fairly disclose its concerns to the appellant for comment during its processing of the application and deprived her of a fair opportunity to respond to these concerns.

The assessment of whether the client’s employment substantially matches a particular ANZSCO occupation must be a holistic one, taking into account the client’s actual employment, in the context of the business operation in question. The assessment should not be a mechanistic “ticking-off” of a certain number of ANZSCO tasks. In the case of occupation of a Retail Manager, satisfaction of the ANZSCO description for that occupation, namely, to “organise and control” the operations of a particular establishment, is pivotal to a finding of a substantial match.

The Tribunal found that INZ’s decision was not procedurally and substantively correct. INZ failed to inform the client of its prejudicial concerns and to afford her opportunity to comment upon them. It also failed to take into account all relevant evidence of her employment in the context of the business in which she was employed. Had it given the application proper consideration, there was evidence capable of demonstrating that the client performed each of the relevant tasks for a Retail Manager (General). The business in which the client operated was an independent dealer and held a supply agreement which solely prescribed the sale and marketing of fuel and fuel products in the service station, and the service station had full autonomy for the remaining product sold in the retail store.

For this reason, the application was returned to INZ for a reassessment and now our client with her family are finally residents of New Zealand.