Yeo (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Training (Class GF) visa, Subclass 407, made by Mr Yeo. The dispute arose because the applicant did not have an approved nomination by a training and research sponsor, which is a requirement for this visa subclass. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the decision to refuse the visa should be affirmed.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria under clause 407.214 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that a sponsor must have nominated a training program for the applicant, and this nomination must have been approved under section 140GB of the Migration Act 1958. Furthermore, the approval of the nomination must not have ceased, and there must be no adverse information known to the Department about the sponsor, or any such information must be reasonable to disregard.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the status of the nomination application made by 3 Fat Monkeys Pty Ltd. It was established that the nomination application was refused on 31 May 2019. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that the sponsor, 3 Fat Monkeys Pty Ltd, had sought review of this refusal before the Tribunal, but subsequently withdrew that review on 29 August 2022. The Tribunal explained that a requirement for the visa is that the nomination must have been approved and not subsequently withdrawn. As the nomination review had been withdrawn, this criterion was not met. The applicant was informed of this information and its relevance, and acknowledged that it might lead to the affirmation of the decision.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr Yeo a Training (Class GF) Subclass 407 visa, as the requirement for an approved and un-withdrawn nomination was not satisfied.