Fayad Benitez (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Training Visa (Class GF) subclass 407, brought before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by Fayad Benitez. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant had been identified in an approved training nomination application made by a sponsor for the visa, and whether the applicant met the relevant criteria under regulation 407.214 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the requirements of regulation 407.214, which stipulates that if the approved sponsor is not a Commonwealth agency, the sponsor must have nominated a training program for the applicant under section 140GB(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958, and this nomination must have been approved under section 140GB on the basis of regulation 2.72A. Additionally, the approval of the nomination must not have ceased, and there must be no adverse information known to the Department about the sponsor or associated persons, or any such information must be reasonable to disregard.

The Tribunal found that the sponsor was not a Commonwealth agency. Crucially, the Tribunal had previously decided on 14 November 2022 to affirm the Department's decision not to approve the nomination. Despite being invited to respond to this decision by 28 November 2022, the applicant did not provide a response. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not the subject of an approved nomination under section 140GB of the Act, and therefore, regulation 407.214 was not met. The Tribunal also noted the absence of any evidence of further applications by the applicant for a visa or review.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Training Visa (Class GF) subclass 407.