McLoughlin (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, made by an applicant seeking to work as a Carpenter. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations, which mandates an approved nomination for an occupation by a standard business sponsor, and that such approval has not ceased.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant satisfied the criteria under cl.457.223(4)(a), specifically concerning the validity of the nomination for their proposed employment. This involved assessing whether an approved nomination existed and if its approval remained in effect at the time of the Tribunal's decision, particularly in light of legislative amendments and the expiry of the original nomination.

The Tribunal reasoned that the nomination for the applicant's position, initially approved on 16 October 2017, expired on 16 October 2018, as per regulation 2.75. Subsequently, legislative amendments in March 2018 repealed and replaced the criteria for nominations relating to subclass 457 visas, which was also closed to new applications. The Tribunal issued a section 359A notice inviting comments on this information, but the applicant failed to respond within the prescribed period. Applying section 359C and 360(3) of the Migration Act, the Tribunal proceeded to a decision without further comment, finding that the applicant had not demonstrated they were the subject of an approved, un-ceased nomination.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas, concluding that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been met.