Tsukamoto (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)), by the first applicant, with the second and third applicants applying as members of his family unit. The dispute arose from the refusal of the applicant's nomination application by the Department. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal considered the legal issue of whether the applicant satisfied clause 457.223(4)(a), which mandates an approved nomination by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased. The Tribunal noted that while the Department had initially refused the nomination, the Tribunal itself had subsequently set aside that decision and approved the nomination. The Tribunal was therefore satisfied that the nomination for the occupation of Hairdresser (ANZSCO 391111) by Yellow Wave Pty Ltd had been approved, that the nominator was a standard business sponsor at the time of approval, and that the nomination had not ceased.

The Tribunal reasoned that because the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) were met, the appropriate course was to remit the visa applications for reconsideration by the Minister. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant met this specific criterion for a Subclass 457 visa. The applications of the second and third applicants, as family members, would be determined based on the outcome of the first applicant's application upon remittal.