Kaur (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking review of a departmental decision not to approve a nomination for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)). The applicant, represented by their legal representative, sought review of a decision affirming the refusal to approve a nomination for the occupation of Arborist.

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 the relevant kind by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased. The Tribunal was required to determine if the nomination provided by the applicant, issued to Boumbis Orchards Pty Ltd for a Subclass 482 visa, satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 457 visa nomination, particularly in light of legislative changes that repealed the Subclass 457 visa program.

The Tribunal reasoned that the legislative scheme changed on 18 March 2018, meaning nomination applications made on or after that date were not in relation to Subclass 457 visa applicants. The approved nomination submitted by the applicant was specifically for a Subclass 482 visa, not a Subclass 457 visa. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant was not the subject of an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor of the relevant kind, and therefore, the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) were not met. As the applicant did not satisfy the primary criteria for the Subclass 457 visa, the Tribunal also found that the secondary applicant did not satisfy the secondary criteria as required by clause 457.321.

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