ZHAO (Migration)

This matter concerned the review of a decision not to grant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457, to the applicant, Mr. Zhao. The dispute arose because the Department had refused to approve the nomination of Mr. Zhao for the occupation of Managing Director, and consequently refused his visa application due to the absence of an approved nomination. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) conducted a hearing to review both the refused nomination and the visa application concurrently.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates an approved nomination of an occupation by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had an approved nomination in relation to him, as this was a prerequisite for the visa grant under the standard business sponsor stream.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Department's decision to refuse the nomination was affirmed by the Tribunal on 29 November 2019. Subsequently, the Tribunal notified the applicant of this affirmation and of the regulatory requirement for an approved nomination, inviting him to respond or request an extension. As no response or request for an extension was received by the specified deadline, the Tribunal proceeded to make its decision based on the available information. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not the subject of an approved nomination under section 140GB of the Act, and therefore, the requirements of clause 457.223(4)(a) were not met.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa. The Tribunal found that the requirements for the standard business sponsor stream had not been satisfied, and no claims or evidence were presented regarding other streams within clause 457.223.