Liang (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, by a Conference and Event Organiser. The applicant sought review of a departmental decision not to approve a nomination in respect of them, and subsequently, a decision to refuse the grant of the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements for the visa, specifically concerning the necessity of an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations, which mandates an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased. The Tribunal had previously affirmed the decision not to approve the nomination. In considering the visa application, the Tribunal notified the applicant of information on departmental records indicating the absence of an approved nomination, explaining that this information was relevant to the visa refusal. The applicant was invited to provide comments or a response within a specified period, with the possibility of requesting an extension.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant failed to provide the requested information or seek an extension of time within the prescribed period. Citing established case law, the Tribunal noted that such a failure, pursuant to section 363A of the Migration Act, precludes the applicant from being offered a hearing. Consequently, as the applicant had lost the right to present arguments and evidence, and given that the decision to refuse the nominating employer's application had been affirmed, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the requirement of having an approved nomination. The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.