Kaur (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Ms Kaur, the primary applicant for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa (Subclass 457), and her secondary applicants. The dispute centred on whether the primary applicant met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically concerning an approved nomination for the occupation.

The Tribunal was required to determine if there was an approved nomination for the applicant's occupation by a standard business sponsor that had not ceased. The Tribunal noted that the nominator had applied for review of the Department's decision to refuse to approve the nomination application, and this refusal had been affirmed by the Tribunal in a previous proceeding. Furthermore, the Tribunal observed that it was no longer possible to apply for a new nomination supporting a Subclass 457 visa after 18 March 2018.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal explained that the absence of an approved nomination that had not ceased would be a reason to affirm the decision to refuse the visa. The applicant requested an indefinite adjournment to seek a new nomination for a Subclass 482 visa, but the Tribunal declined, citing previous decisions such as *Huo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs* [2002] FCA 617 and *Manna v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship* [2014] FMCA 28, which establish that the Tribunal is not required to indefinitely defer its decision-making. The Tribunal also had regard to the principles of reasonableness of adjournment requests as discussed in *Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li* [2013] HCA 18 and *Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh* [2014] FCAFC 1.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the primary applicant a Subclass 457 visa due to the lack of an approved nomination. The Tribunal also affirmed the decision not to grant the secondary applicants visas, as they did not meet the criteria for being family members of a Subclass 457 visa holder and had not met the primary visa criteria in their own right.