TANTRAKUL (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by visa applicants against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) which affirmed the refusal to grant them Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas, specifically under the Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa program. The core of the dispute revolved around an approved nomination by a Standard Business Sponsor for the position of Marketing Specialist.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicants met the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This subclause mandates that there must be an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor, and that this approval must not have ceased. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicants could satisfy the criteria for other streams within clause 457.223, and whether the secondary applicant could meet the criteria for secondary applicants.

The Tribunal reasoned that on 4 July 2018, it had affirmed the Department's decision not to approve the nomination made by Good Day Study Pty Ltd for the position of Marketing Specialist. Subsequently, the Tribunal notified the applicants that this meant they were unable to meet the requirements of paragraph 457.223(4)(a). As the applicants provided no response or further information, the Tribunal found there was no evidence before it that the applicants were the subject of an approved nomination. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the requirements of subclause 457.223(4)(a) were not met. Furthermore, no claims were made regarding other visa streams, and there was no evidence that the applicants could satisfy those criteria, nor could the secondary applicant meet their requirements.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas to the applicants.