Melbourne Radiology Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned a review by the Tribunal of a decision to refuse the nomination of an applicant, Melbourne Radiology Pty Ltd, for a visa under the medium-term stream. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant had satisfied the relevant criteria for the nomination, particularly concerning labour market testing and the genuineness and full-time nature of the nominated position.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Melbourne Radiology Pty Ltd met the criteria for approval of the nomination, as stipulated by section 140GB(2) of the Act and regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant had satisfied the labour market testing requirements under section 140GBA and whether the nominated position was genuine and full-time, as required by regulation 2.72(10). A key procedural issue was whether the applicant had provided requested information within the prescribed timeframe.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had failed to provide updated and current information about its business operations and the nominated position by the requested deadline of 9 August 2022, nor had it sought an extension. Consequently, section 359C of the Act applied, meaning the nominator was not entitled to appear before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the nominated position was genuine and full-time, as no information regarding the current business operations or demand for services had been provided. The Tribunal applied the principles that a nominator must provide requested information and that the nominated position must be genuine and full-time unless specific exceptions apply.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.