McNally (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457, made by Ms McNally. The primary issue before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations. This clause mandates that there must be an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor, which has not ceased.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied clause 457.223(4)(a), specifically concerning the existence of an approved nomination. This involved considering whether the nomination made by Vic River, an approved standard business sponsor, had been validly approved and had not ceased. The Tribunal also needed to assess if the nomination was made by a standard business sponsor at the time of approval.

The Tribunal found that while the initial delegate had refused to approve Vic River's nomination, the Tribunal itself had subsequently set aside that decision and substituted a decision to approve the nomination. Based on the evidence before it, the Tribunal was satisfied that the nomination now met the prescribed criteria in regulation 2.72 and that the approval had not ceased. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that clause 457.223(4)(a) was met.

Given this finding, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate course of action was to remit the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining criteria for a Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal directed that for the purposes of reconsideration, the visa applicant was to be considered as meeting the criteria set out in clause 457.223(4)(a).