TANGWATANAKHIT (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), made by Mr Tangwatanakhit. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to determine whether the delegate's decision to refuse the visa should be affirmed.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Tangwatanakhit met the requirements of cl.457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically concerning the existence of an approved nomination that had not ceased. This was in light of the repeal of the 457 visa program and the passage of time since the application was lodged. The Tribunal also considered whether Mr Tangwatanakhit could satisfy the criteria for the labour agreement stream, though no claims had been made in this regard.

The Tribunal reasoned that the approved nomination supporting Mr Tangwatanakhit's application had ceased on 13 December 2017, as notified to the applicant. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that following amendments to the Regulations, new applications for approval of a nomination in support of a Subclass 457 visa could no longer be made. As there was no evidence of an approved or pending nomination relating to Mr Tangwatanakhit, and the existing nomination had ceased, the Tribunal concluded that cl.457.223(4)(a) was not met. The Tribunal also found no evidence that Mr Tangwatanakhit could satisfy the criteria for the labour agreement stream.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr Tangwatanakhit a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa.