Manepalli (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) considered an application for review of a decision not to grant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)). The applicant sought review of the delegate's decision to refuse the visa. The Tribunal, constituted by Member Denise Connolly, ultimately affirmed the delegate's decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This subclause 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 was required to determine if the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy this criterion.

The Tribunal found that there was no evidence before it demonstrating that the applicant met the requirement of having an approved nomination. The applicant was aware that this was the central issue, having provided the delegate's decision record with their review application. Despite this, neither the applicant nor their representative had provided any further evidence to establish the existence of an approved nomination that had not ceased. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a), nor were any claims made or evidence provided regarding other streams within clause 457.223. The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.