Pyramids Render Stars Pty Ltd (Migration) [2020] AATA 3220 (11 June 2020)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
REVIEW APPLICANT: Pyramids Render Stars Pty Ltd
VISA APPLICANT: Mr Mohamed Adel Ahmed Risha
CASE NUMBER: 1834002
DIBP REFERENCE(S): BCC2018/750150
MEMBER:Penelope Hunter
DATE:11 June 2020
PLACE OF DECISION: Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:
·cl.457.223(4)(da) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Statement made on 11 June 2020 at 6:00pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION– Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa–Subclass 457– evidence of the applicant’s employment provided – employment is ongoing –skills, qualification and employment background of the applicant – decision under review remittedLEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 140GB
Migration Regulations 1994, r 2.75, cl 457.223CASES
Joshi v MIMIA [2005] FMCA 1116STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The visa applicant applied for the visa on 14 February 2018.
At the time the visa application was lodged, Class UC contained Subclass 457. The criteria for a Subclass 457 visa are set out in Part 457 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). One of the criteria to be satisfied at the time of decision is cl.457.223 which requires the visa applicant to satisfy one of the alternative ‘streams’ for the visa. One of these streams is contained in cl.457.223(4) which is set out in the attachment to this decision. In the present case, specific claims have been made against cl.457.223(4) which applies to sponsorship for employment in an occupation by a standard business sponsor. No claims have been made in respect of the other alternative streams in cl.457.223.
The delegate refused to grant the visa on 14 November 2018 on the basis that cl.457.223(4)(da) was not met because the delegate was not satisfied that the visa applicant had demonstrated that he had the skills, qualifications and employment background necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation.
Mr Amir Abdel Badie, on behalf of the review applicant, and the visa applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 3 June 2020 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic and English languages. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to hold the hearing by telephone. The hearing was held during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribunal determined it was reasonable to hold a hearing by telephone, having regard to the nature of this matter and the individual circumstances of the applicant. The Tribunal also had regard to the Tribunal’s objective of providing a mechanism of review that is fair, just, economical and quick, and the delay to the matter if…
Continue reading Pyramids Render Stars Pty Ltd (Migration)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Pyramids Render Stars Pty Ltd (Migration) [2020] AATA 3220
- Case
- [2020] AATA 3220
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court's reasoning focused on the interpretation of clause 457.223(4)(da), which mandates that an applicant must have the skills, qualifications, and employment background deemed necessary by the Minister to perform the nominated occupation. While the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) was used as a guide for the duties and expected qualifications of a Solid Plasterer, the Tribunal acknowledged that a decision requires more than a simple matching exercise. The court affirmed the principle established in *Joshi v MIMIA*, which dictates that a sensible approach involves ascertaining an applicant's attributes and skills and how these are applied in the workplace for remuneration.
Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. The decision directed that the visa applicant be considered to meet the criteria under clause 457.223(4)(da) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, allowing for further assessment of the remaining criteria for the Subclass 457 visa.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.