Amarjit Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision by the Department of Immigration not to approve a business nomination application, which in turn impacted the eligibility of Mr. Amarjit Singh for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically the necessity of being the subject of an approved nomination.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the criteria for a subclass 457 visa, particularly clause 457.223(4)(a), which mandates an approved nomination. This involved considering whether the applicant had responded to adverse information provided by the tribunal and whether the tribunal retained the power to permit the applicant to appear before it given the lack of response. The tribunal also had to assess if the applicant could meet the requirements for any other streams within clause 457.223.

The tribunal affirmed the decision not to approve the nomination, noting that the applicant had failed to respond to a section 359A letter inviting comments on adverse information by the stipulated deadline. Despite an initial adjournment to allow further time for submissions, the applicant still did not provide the required response. The tribunal reasoned that, in the absence of a response to the adverse information and given the applicant's failure to seek an extension, section 359C of the Migration Act 1958 applied, meaning the applicant was not entitled to appear before the tribunal. Citing *Hasran v MIAC* [2010] FCAFC 40, the tribunal held that without an entitlement to a hearing, it had no power to permit an appearance. Consequently, the tribunal found that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been met, and no claims were made or evidence presented to satisfy other streams.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa.