Peraza Rojas (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr. Peraza Rojas concerning his application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) (Subclass 457) visa. The delegate had refused the visa on 25 September 2018, a decision that was subsequently affirmed by the Tribunal. The core of the dispute revolved around the applicant's failure to meet a crucial requirement for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if a nomination of an occupation in relation to the applicant had been approved, as mandated by subclause 457.223(4)(a)(i). The Tribunal had previously advised the applicant that the nomination made by his nominating employer, WEDAN CONSULTING PTY LTD, had been refused by the Department on 24 November 2017, and that this information was relevant to his visa application.

The Tribunal's reasoning was based on the fact that the nomination application had been refused. Clause 457.223(4)(a)(i) explicitly requires that a nomination of an occupation in relation to the applicant must have been approved. As the nomination in this case had not been approved, the applicant had failed to meet this essential criterion. The Tribunal noted that no response was received from the applicant after being invited to comment on this adverse information. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been met, and as no claims were made regarding other streams, the applicant could not satisfy the specific criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa.