Singh (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal, constituted by Member Danielle Galvin, considered an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), Standard Business Sponsorship stream. The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant the visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the requirements for this visa stream, specifically concerning an approved nomination.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This subclause requires, among other things, that a nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant has been approved by a standard business sponsor and that this approval has not ceased. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria for other streams within clause 457.223, in the absence of claims or evidence relating to them.

The Tribunal reasoned that clause 457.223(4)(a)(i) mandates an approved nomination. It found that as the Department had refused to approve the nomination and the sponsor had subsequently withdrawn their review application for that refusal, there was no approved nomination in place. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had failed to meet this essential requirement for the standard business sponsorship stream. As no claims or evidence were presented regarding other streams, the Tribunal affirmed the original decision.

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