Medinova Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Medinova Pty Ltd for approval of an employer nomination for the position of Health Practice Manager under the Direct Entry nomination stream. The applicant operated a medical practice in Cowra, NSW, and was in the process of opening a second practice in Blayney, NSW. The core dispute revolved around whether Medinova Pty Ltd met all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the approval of its nomination. The decision was made by Member Karen McNamara.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's nomination application satisfied all the criteria outlined in regulation 5.19(4). Specifically, the Tribunal was required to determine if the application was made in the approved form, identified a genuine need for the nominated position under the nominator's direct control, and if the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business. Further considerations included whether the terms and conditions of employment were no less favourable than those offered to Australian citizens or permanent residents, if there was any adverse information known to Immigration, and if the nominator had a satisfactory record of compliance with workplace relations laws. Crucially, the Tribunal had to assess whether the position met the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h), particularly concerning the genuine need for the position and its location in regional Australia.

The Tribunal reasoned that the application met the formal requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(a), including being in the approved form and identifying a need for the position, supported by evidence such as a statement of the position's value and reference material from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. It was satisfied that the nominator was actively and lawfully operating a business and that the terms and conditions of employment were appropriate. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no adverse information and a satisfactory record of workplace relations compliance. Applying regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii), the Tribunal determined that the position was located in regional Australia and that there was a genuine need for the nominee to be employed under the nominator's direct control, with the tasks corresponding to an occupation specified in the relevant legislative instrument.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Medinova Pty Ltd had met all the requirements of regulation 5.19(4). The decision under review was set aside, and a substituted decision approving the nomination was made.