Villanueva (Migration)

[2017] AATA 2773

Villanueva (Migration) [2017] AATA 2773 (12 December 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mrs Marivi Villanueva
Mr Aaron Villanueva
Master Miyu Gabriel Villanueva

CASE NUMBER:  1706171

DIBP REFERENCE(S):  BCC2016/3324235

MEMBER:Antonio Dronjic

DATE:12 December 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:

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

Statement made on 12 December 2017 at 10:50am

CATCHWORDS
Migration – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – Approved nomination

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 140GB
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2 cl 457.223

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant the applicants Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The applicants applied for the visas on 7 October 2016. The delegate refused to grant the visas on 16 March 2017 on the basis that cl.457.223(4)(a) was not met because a nomination of an occupation in relation to the first named applicant has not been approved.

2. On 9 October 2017, the applicants submitted to the Tribunal a copy of the Nomination Approval Letter issued by the Department on 9 June 2017; stating the nominated occupation of an Accountant (ANZSCO 221111) and applicant’s base salary of $60,000.

3. On the basis of the evidence of an approved nomination dated 9 June 2017in respect of the first named applicant, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination of the occupation of an Accountant in relation to the first named applicant has been approved under section 140GB of the Act.

4. The Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination was made by Accommodation & Care Solutions Pty Ltd, who was a standard business sponsor at the time of approval. Further, the Tribunal is satisfied that the nomination has not ceased. Consequently, the Tribunal finds that the first named applicant meets cl.457.223 (4)(a).

5. Given the findings above, 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

6. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:

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

   Antonio Dronjic
   Member