Suzuki (Migration)

[2019] AATA 593

Suzuki (Migration) [2019] AATA 593 (18 February 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mr Haruya Suzuki
Ms Youjin Kim

CASE NUMBER:  1900508

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2018/1282235

MEMBER:Karen Synon

DATE:18 February 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:

·cl.457.223(4)(eb) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 18 February 2019 at 7:28am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – English language requirements – test results submitted to Tribunal – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 457.223(4)

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 Immigration to refuse to grant the visa applicants Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The visa applicants applied for the visa on 17 March 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 (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 visas on 19 December 2018 on the basis that cl.457.223(4)(eb) was not met because the first named applicant (‘the applicant’) did not provide evidence of meeting the English language requirement.

5. The applicants were represented in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

6. The Tribunal is satisfied it has jurisdiction in this case on the basis of a defective ‘notification of refusal…’ which erroneously stated that the applicants did not have review rights.

7. On the basis of the information before it the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicants pursuant to s.360(2)(a) of the Act.

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

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

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

   English language proficiency

10. The English language requirements for this visa are set out in cl.457.223(4)(eb) and (ec). They differ depending on the applicant’s circumstances.  In the present case cl.457.223(4)(eb) relevant.  It requires that:

    ·if the applicant is not an exempt applicant as described in the specified instrument and is not a person who will be paid at least a level of salary specified in that instrument in circumstances where it is considered the granting of the visa would be in the interests of Australia; then he or she must have achieved in a single attempt a test score specified in that instrument in the specified time.

11. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is not an 'exempt' applicant or is being paid a salary above that in the instrument.

12. On 7 February 2019, the applicant provided the Tribunal with a copy of IELTS test results for a test he undertook on 19 January 2019.  These results record that the applicant achieved a score of at least 4.5 in each of the four components of the test.  These results were verified by the Tribunal on 7 February 2019.

13. On this basis, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant has a level of English language proficiency that is required to achieve an IELTS test score of at least 4.5 in each of the 4 test components of speaking, reading, writing and listening.

14. The applicant therefore satisfies the requirements of cl.457.223(4)(eb).

15. Given this finding, 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

16. The Tribunal remits the applications for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:

    ·cl.457.223(4)(eb) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Karen Synon
    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.