Li v Minister for Immigration
[2005] FMCA 120
•15 February 2005
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| LI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION | [2005] FMCA 120 |
| MIGRATION – Application for Temporary Business Entry visa (Class UC, subclass 457) – application dependent upon approval of business sponsor – proposed business sponsor’s application unsuccessful. |
| Applicant: | WEN QUAN LI |
| Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
| File No: | SZ 623 of 2003 |
| Delivered on: | 15 February 2005 |
| Delivered at: | Brisbane |
| Hearing date: | 5 March 2004 |
| Judgment of: | Jarrett FM |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr Turner |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Yandell Wright Stell Lawyers |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr Bromwich |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Australian Government Solicitor |
ORDERS
That the application be dismissed.
The applicant pay the costs of the respondent to be agreed and failing agreement to be taxed according to the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SZ 623 of 2003
| WEN QUAN LI |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
The applicant first entered Australia on 23 May, 1998 as the holder of a Temporary Business Entry (class UC), subclass 457 (Business Long Stay visa that was valid until 10 September, 1999. Included in his visa was his wife Shu Ying Liu.
On 8 September, 1999 the applicant applied for a further subclass 457 visa. On 4 December, 2000 a delegate of the respondent refused the application on the basis that the proposed business sponsor, Hua Cheng Trading Pty Ltd had not been approved as a pre-qualified business sponsor or a standard business sponsor.
On 22 December, 2001, the applicant sought review of that decision by the Migration Review Tribunal. The proposed business sponsor also sought review of the decision to refuse its application for approval as a business sponsor.
By a decision dated 28 March, 2003 the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the delegate refusing the applicant's visa. At the same time, the proposed business sponsor’s application for review was declined.
The applicant seeks review by way of prerogative writ of the Tribunal’s decision. The application was heard by the court immediately following as the proposed business sponsor’s application (SZ 2633 of 2003). This application is dependent upon the success of the proposed business sponsor’s application. I have dismissed the proposed business sponsor’s application and therefore this application must be dismissed. The applicant cannot succeed in his application for a subclass 457 visa. A necessary requirement for a subclass 457 visa is that there be an approved business sponsor.
I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Jarrett FM
Associate: S. Haysom
Date: February 15, 2005
0
0
0