EM Moderity Care Pty Ltd (Migration)

Case

[2021] AATA 1385

7 May 2021


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
EM Moderity Care Pty Ltd (Migration) [2021] AATA 1385 [2021] AATA 1385 7 May 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning EM Moderity Care Pty Ltd's application for approval of a nomination for a position under the Direct Entry nomination stream. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant, EM Moderity Care Pty Ltd, met all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of the nominated position.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the nominated position and the nominator's business satisfied the criteria for the Direct Entry nomination stream, specifically focusing on the genuine need for the position, the inability to fill it with a local citizen or permanent resident, and the applicant's qualifications and performance in the role. The Tribunal also considered whether the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws and if there was any adverse information known to the Department of Immigration.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's business, a special needs residential facility located in regional Australia, demonstrated a genuine need for a Facilities Manager. Evidence presented indicated significant difficulty in recruiting and retaining suitably qualified staff in the regional location, a situation exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The nominee had been performing the role effectively for over three years and was considered an invaluable employee. The Tribunal was satisfied that the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws and that no adverse information was known to Immigration.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and substituted a new decision approving the nomination.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0