HUA (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), by Xiao Hong Hua and George F Meng. The core of the dispute revolved around the requirement for an approved nomination of an occupation by a standard business sponsor, as stipulated by clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations. The Tribunal was asked to review the decision not to grant these visas.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants met all the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a). This clause mandates that there must be an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor, and that this approval must not have ceased. The Tribunal also considered whether the secondary applicant, George F Meng, met the criteria under clause 457.321, which requires being a member of the family unit of a primary applicant who holds a Subclass 457 visa.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the fact that the nomination application by Mengtor Pty Ltd for the occupation of marketing specialist, with Xiao Hong Hua as the nominee, had been refused on 13 November 2017. Despite being notified of this refusal and given an opportunity to respond by 30 November 2017, the applicants provided no comments or further information. Consequently, the Tribunal found that there was no evidence of an approved nomination for the applicant. As the primary applicant did not meet the requirement of being the subject of an approved nomination, the secondary applicant could not satisfy the criteria of being a family unit member of a Subclass 457 visa holder.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas to the applicants, concluding that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been met due to the absence of an approved nomination.