Tianok (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking review of a decision not to grant a Temporary Work (Long Stay Activity) (Class GB) visa, subclass 401, under the sport stream. The primary decision to refuse the visa was based on the delegate's dissatisfaction with the applicant's genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 401.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates that an applicant be identified in an approved nomination and that the approval of that nomination has not ceased. This nomination must have been made by an approved sponsor. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider whether there was any adverse information known to the Department about the nominator or associated persons, or if such information could be disregarded.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant's original refusal was due to concerns under clause 401.214, which relates to the genuine intention to stay temporarily. The delegate had found that the applicant's extended stay in Australia on multiple temporary visas indicated a lack of genuine temporary intention. The Tribunal affirmed its power to exercise all the powers and discretions of the primary decision-maker, effectively standing in their shoes. Applying this, and considering the evidence, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 401.212, as there was no evidence of an approved nomination.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review and ordered that the applicant not be granted the Temporary Work (Long Stay Activity) (Class GB) visa.