Chaudhary (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), made by the first applicant, with the second applicant applying as a member of the family unit. The dispute arose from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection's refusal to approve the nomination of the applicant's occupation. The case came before the Tribunal for review of this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically concerning the approval of a nomination for the occupation of Restaurant Manager. This clause requires that a nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant has been approved by a standard business sponsor and that this approval has not ceased.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's nominating employer, Diyu Da Dhaba Pty Ltd, had applied for approval of the Restaurant Manager position, which was initially refused by the Department. However, on review, the Tribunal had set aside the Department's decision and substituted a decision to approve the nomination on 11 July 2019. As the employer's approval as a standard business sponsor was valid until 23 February 2023, and the nomination had now been approved, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the criterion in clause 457.223(4)(a).

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas for reconsideration by the Minister. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met the criteria under clause 457.223(4)(a) for a Subclass 457 visa, and the second applicant's application would be determined based on the outcome of the first applicant's reconsidered application.