Merimbula RSL Club Limited (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Merimbula RSL Club Limited (the applicant) concerning the approval of a nomination under the Direct Entry stream of the skilled migration program. The applicant sought to nominate a position for a Cook. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant had met all the requirements stipulated in regulation 5.19(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 for the nomination to be approved.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the various criteria outlined in regulation 5.19(4), including but not limited to, having the financial capacity to employ the nominee for at least two years, offering terms and conditions of employment no less favourable than those provided to Australian citizens or permanent residents, demonstrating a genuine need for the employment, and ensuring the position could not be filled by a locally resident Australian citizen or permanent resident. Additionally, the Tribunal had to assess the applicant's compliance with workplace relations laws and the absence of adverse information known to the Department of Home Affairs.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal reviewed extensive documentary evidence provided by the applicant, including financial statements, tax returns, employment contracts, position descriptions, advertisements, and advice from a Regional Certifying Body. The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(e) regarding financial capacity, regulation 5.19(4)(f) concerning adverse information, and regulation 5.19(4)(g) relating to satisfactory compliance with workplace relations laws. Crucially, the Tribunal determined that the requirements of regulation 5.19(4)(h)(ii), which apply to positions located in regional Australia, were met, specifically that the position was located in regional Australia, there was a genuine need for the nominee, and the position could not be filled by a local resident.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision to refuse the nomination and substituted a decision approving the nomination.