Dhillon (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), by a primary applicant and a secondary applicant. The dispute arose because the Department of Home Affairs had not approved a nomination in respect of the primary applicant by their proposed nominator, KHOWEISS BROTHERS PTY LTD, and there was no information on the Department's files recording an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to determine whether the primary applicant met the requirements of cl.457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased.

The Tribunal reasoned that as the review of the nomination had been withdrawn and no relevant nomination was recorded on the Department's files, the primary applicant could not satisfy cl.457.223(4)(a). Consequently, the primary applicant did not meet the primary criteria for the grant of a Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal further noted that because the primary applicant failed to meet the primary criteria, the secondary applicant, who relied on being a member of the primary applicant's family unit, also failed to meet the secondary criteria under cl.457.321. The Tribunal found that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been met, and no claims or evidence were presented regarding other streams of cl.457.223.

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