Dhaliwal (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), made by an applicant whose employer, Pricemen Investments Pty Ltd, had a prior nomination application refused by the Department. The employer sought review of this refusal with the Tribunal, but the Tribunal affirmed the refusal decision. The applicant and their employer failed to respond to the Tribunal's invitation to comment, despite being granted additional time.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations, which mandates an approved nomination of an occupation by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased. The Tribunal was also required to consider whether it should defer its decision pending any potential new nomination, given legislative changes that occurred after the initial nomination refusal.

The Tribunal reasoned that even if a new nomination were secured, it would not satisfy clause 457.223(4)(a). This was due to legislative amendments introduced on 18 March 2018, which repealed the subclass 457 visa and replaced it with the subclass 482 visa, introducing new criteria for nominations. Under the amended regulations, a nomination lodged after 18 March 2018 can only support an application for a subclass 482 visa or for existing subclass 482 or 457 visa holders, not for a new subclass 457 visa application that has not been finally determined. The Tribunal also considered relevant case law, including *Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li*, *Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs*, *Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship*, and *Chen v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection*, which established that the Tribunal is not required to indefinitely defer its decision-making processes and that deferral may be unreasonable.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, as the requirements for the standard business sponsorship stream were not met. No claims were made regarding other streams, and there was no evidence the applicant could satisfy their specific criteria.