1601827 (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by a visa applicant against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) concerning an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor. The Tribunal considered the matter on the papers, deeming a hearing unnecessary.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant satisfied the criteria set out in subclause 457.223(4)(a), which mandates that a nomination of an occupation in relation to the applicant must have been approved under section 140GB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), made by a standard business sponsor at the time of approval, and that such approval had not ceased. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the nominated occupation was specified in a relevant instrument and other related criteria.

The Tribunal found that the nomination application lodged by the prospective employer, Public Enterprise Pty Ltd, had been approved on 3 November 2016, following an earlier refusal. It was satisfied that the nomination for the occupation of Restaurant Manager was made by Public Enterprise Pty Ltd, who was a standard business sponsor at the time of approval, and that the nomination had not ceased. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the first named applicant met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a).

The Tribunal remitted the applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the first named applicant met the criteria specified in subclause 457.223(4)(a).