SINGH (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the review application of Mr. Singh and his family concerning their Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)). The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant had provided the necessary information regarding an approved nomination within the prescribed timeframe, as required by the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicants had satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 457 visa, specifically clause 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, which mandates an approved nomination of an occupation by a standard business sponsor. The Tribunal also had to consider whether to exercise its discretion to grant an extension of time for the applicants to provide this crucial information, or to proceed with a decision based on the available evidence.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicants' failure to provide the requested information by the extended deadline of 16 January 2018. Despite being granted an extension, the applicants' authorised representative informed the Tribunal that they had no instructions from the client and requested a decision. Consequently, the Tribunal found that section 359C of the Act applied, meaning the applicants were not entitled to a hearing under section 360(3). The Tribunal also considered its power to adjourn the review under section 363(1)(b) but, referencing established case law, concluded that it was not required to indefinitely defer its decision-making process. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visas, as the primary applicant did not satisfy the primary criteria, and by extension, the secondary applicants did not satisfy the criteria for being a member of the family unit of a Subclass 457 visa holder.