CALMA (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, standard business sponsor stream. The applicants sought review of a decision to refuse to grant them this visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning the existence of an approved nomination for the occupation in relation to the applicant by a standard business sponsor that had not ceased. The Tribunal also considered whether the second applicant met the secondary visa criteria as a member of the family unit of a primary applicant, or the primary criteria in their own right.

The Tribunal reasoned that clause 457.223(4)(a) mandates an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor. Based on the information before it, the Tribunal found that no such approved nomination existed. Consequently, the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) were not met, and the Tribunal also found that the second applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a secondary applicant or the primary criteria independently.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas to the applicants.