MIGR8 CASE STORIES
EMPLOYER SPONSORSHIPSource published: 13 July 2026

National branding did not remove the need for local marketing.

A franchise explained why its Marketing Specialist role was genuine.

MIGR8 AUSTRALIA · Editorial review: 5 October 2026
Illustrative image; not the people involved in the reported case.

A third-party public report, summarised by MIGR8. This was not a case managed by MIGR8.

The situation and reported outcome

Kris Ahn Lawyers reports a 482 nomination refused because a franchisor already provided marketing. Review evidence distinguished national campaigns from the franchisee’s local work. The nomination was approved after review.

∞

The MIGR8 perspective

explain your operating model in terms a decision-maker can verify. A familiar business label may hide very different responsibilities.

Your next move

Use agreements, campaign records and responsibility statements to show the actual need for the position. This reported case used earlier 482 settings.

Explore the source

Kris Ahn Lawyers

Original MIGR8 summary based on the linked source. Rules and circumstances can change. Other case outcomes do not guarantee a similar result.

MIGR8 AUSTRALIA

General information and editorial commentary. Check current rules and your circumstances before acting.

WhatsApp · +61 425 481 703