Intermost Pty Ltd (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a dispute concerning the approval of a nomination for a position under the Direct Entry stream of the Migration Regulations 1994. The applicant, Intermost Pty Ltd, sought approval for a nomination, and the Tribunal was tasked with determining whether all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 were met.

The Tribunal was required to assess whether the application for approval was made in the approved form, accompanied by the prescribed fee, and included the necessary certification regarding conduct contravening section 245AR(1) of the Act, as well as identifying a genuine need for a paid employee under the nominator's direct control. Further, the Tribunal had to determine if the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, if the nominated position was not for labour hire, and if the terms of employment met specific duration and extension criteria. Additionally, the Tribunal considered whether the terms and conditions of employment were no less favourable than those offered to Australian citizens or permanent residents in equivalent roles, whether there was any adverse information known to Immigration, and if the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws. Finally, the Tribunal had to ascertain if the tasks of the position corresponded to an occupation specified by the Minister, if there was a genuine need for the nominee, if the occupation was applicable, and if certain training requirements were met.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that Intermost Pty Ltd had satisfied all the relevant requirements of regulation 5.19(4). The application was found to be compliant, the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business in Australia, and regulation 5.19(4)(c) concerning labour hire did not apply. The Tribunal was satisfied that the terms and conditions of employment would be no less favourable than those provided to Australian workers, and there was no adverse information known to Immigration. Furthermore, the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws. The nominated position of Civil Engineer was found to correspond to an occupation specified by the Minister, and the Tribunal was satisfied that there was a genuine need for the nominee to be employed in that role, with the tasks aligning with the ANZSCO occupational dictionary.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision approving the nomination.