Sanghera (Migration)

This matter concerned applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas, Subclass 457, brought before the Tribunal. The dispute arose after a delegate of the Minister refused the primary applicant's nomination, which was subsequently set aside by the Tribunal on review, resulting in an approved nomination. The Tribunal was then required to consider the remaining visa criteria for the primary applicant and the secondary applicants, who were family members.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the primary visa applicant met the requirements of cl.457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor. A further issue was whether the secondary applicants met cl.457.321, which requires them to be a member of the family unit of a primary applicant who holds a Subclass 457 visa granted on the basis of satisfying primary criteria and having made a combined application.

The Tribunal reasoned that because it had previously set aside the refusal of the nomination application and substituted a decision in favour of the nomination, there was an approved nomination that had not ceased. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the primary applicant satisfied cl.457.223(4)(a). However, the Tribunal was unable to make a direction that the secondary applicants met cl.457.321 because, at the time of the Tribunal's decision, the primary applicant did not yet hold a Subclass 457 visa.

Accordingly, the Tribunal remitted the applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the primary applicant met the criteria under cl.457.223(4)(a). The cases of the secondary applicants were referred to the Department for fresh consideration.