Srinivas Sastri (Migration)

[2022] AATA 501

Srinivas Sastri (Migration) [2022] AATA 501 (1 February 2022)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Shruti Srinivas Sastri

REPRESENTATIVE:  Mrs Marina Sheryl Collins (MARN: 0745615)

CASE NUMBER:  1901251

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/974583

MEMBER:Ian Berry

DATE:1 February 2022

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

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)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 01 February 2022 at 11:24am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – standard business sponsor – Food Technologist – subject of an approved nomination – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65

Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 457.223

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The visa applicant applied for the visa on 28 February 2018.

3. 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 (Cth) (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.

4. The delegate refused to grant the visa on 7 January 2019 on the basis that cl 457.223(4)(a) was not met because the tasks undertaken by the applicant were not significant enough with the tasks in ANZSCO in respect of the position of Food Technologist.

5. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 17 January 2022 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from Mr Kenneth Sanders, Mr Norman Khov (commercial accountant) and Ms Paula Coutts (senior human relations manager).

6. The applicant was represented in relation to the review.

7. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to hold the hearing by video. During the COVID-19 pandemic, special circumstances exist for the video hearing. The Tribunal also considered the Tribunal’s objective of providing a review that is fair, just, economical and expedient. A hearing by video achieved this end.

8. The applicant provided to the Tribunal a copy of the delegate's decision.

9. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

10. The issue in the present case is whether the primary visa applicant meets the requirements of cl 457.223(4)(a).

11. The applicant’s sponsor and employer Camperdown Powder Pty Ltd (the Sponsor) had its nomination application in which the applicant was identified as its nominee, approved on 31 January 2022.  Further, the occupation of Food Technologist ANZSCO 234212, to be filled by the applicant was nominated by the sponsor which was for all purposes a standard business sponsor.

12. The approval of the nomination has not ceased and moreover, the applicant continues to be employed to work in the nominated occupation in the sponsor’s business.

13. For these reasons the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) are met

14. Given the findings above, the appropriate course is to remit the application for the visa to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for a Subclass 457 visa.

    DECISION

15. 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)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Ian Berry
    Member

    
    

    ATTACHMENT  -  CLAUSE 457.223 (EXTRACT)

    457.223

    …

    Standard business sponsorship

    …

    (4)The applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:

    (a)each of the following applies:

    (i) a nomination of an occupation in relation to the applicant has been approved under section 140GB of the Act;

    (ii)     the nomination was made by a person who was a standard business sponsor at the time the nomination was approved;

    (iii)    the approval of the nomination has not ceased as provided for in regulation 2.75; and

    (aa)the nominated occupation is specified in an instrument in writing for paragraph 2.72 (10) (a) or (aa) that is in effect; and

    (ba)either:

    (i)    the nominated occupation is specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subparagraph; or

    (ii)     each of the following applies:

    (A)the applicant is employed to work in the nominated occupation;

    (B)if the person who made the approved nomination met paragraph 2.59(d) or (e), or paragraph 2.68(e) or (f), in the person’s most recent approval as a standard business sponsor, the applicant is employed to work in a position in the person’s business or in a business of an associated entity of the person;

    (C)if the person who made the approved nomination met paragraph 2.59(h), or paragraph 2.68(i), in the person’s most recent approval as a standard business sponsor, the applicant is employed to work in a position in the person’s business; and

    (d)the Minister is satisfied that:

    (i)    the applicant’s intention to perform the occupation is genuine; and

    (ii)     the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine; and

    (da)the applicant has the skills, qualifications and employment background that the Minister considers necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation; and

    (e)if the Minister requires the applicant to demonstrate that he or she has the skills that are necessary to perform the occupation — the applicant demonstrates that he or she has those skills in the manner specified by the Minister; and

    (eb)if:

    (i)    the applicant is not an exempt applicant; and

    (ii)     subclause (6) does not apply to the applicant;

    the applicant:

    (iv)   has undertaken a language test specified by the Minister in a legislative instrument for this subparagraph; and

    (v)    achieved within the period specified by the Minister in the instrument, in a single attempt at the test, the score specified by the Minister in the instrument; and

    (ec)if the Minister requires the applicant to demonstrate his or her English language proficiency — the applicant demonstrates his or her English language proficiency in the manner specified by the Minister; and

    (f)either:

    (i)    there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the approved nomination mentioned in paragraph (a) or a person associated with that person; or

    (ii)     it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the approved nomination mentioned in paragraph (a) or a person associated with that person.

    …

    (6)This subclause applies to an applicant if:

    (a)the base rate of pay for the applicant, under the terms and conditions of employment about which the Minister was last satisfied for paragraph 2.72(10)(c), is at least the level of salary worked out in the way specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph; and

    (b)the Minister considers that granting a Subclass 457 visa to the applicant would be in the interests of Australia.

    …

    (11)In subclause (4):

    exempt applicant means an applicant who is in a class of applicants specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subclause.