Pazhamalai (Migration) [2021] AATA 5404 (29 September 2021)

DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:	Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:	Ms Monisha Pazhamalai
CASE NUMBER:	1837587
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):	BCC2018/1003290 
MEMBER:	Angela Julian-Armitage
DATE:	29 September 2021
PLACE OF DECISION:	Brisbane
DECISION:	The Tribunal remits the application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:
•	cl 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 29 September 2021 at 9:55am

CATCHWORDS 
MIGRATION – Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) – Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) – standard business sponsor – subject of an approved nomination – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 457.223

statement of decision and reasons
application for review
1.  	This is an application for review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the visa applicant a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
2.  	The visa applicant applied for the visa on 2 March 2018.
3.  	At the time the visa application was lodged, Class UC contained Subclass 457. The criteria for a Subclass 457 visa are set out in Part 457 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). One of the criteria to be satisfied at the time of decision is cl 457.223, which requires the visa applicant to satisfy one of the alternative ‘streams’ for the visa. One of these streams is contained in cl 457.223(4), which is set out in the attachment to this decision. In the present case, specific claims have been made against cl 457.223(4), which applies to sponsorship for employment in an occupation by a standard business sponsor. No claims have been made in respect of the other alternative streams in cl 457.223.
4.  	The delegate refused to grant the visa on 15 December 2018 on the basis that cl 457.223(4)(a) was not met because there was no approved nomination for an occupation relating to the applicant.
5.  	The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 11 May 2021 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from Ms Fiona Murcott and Mr Andrew Lincoln. 
6.  	The applicant was represented in relation to the review by their legal practitioner. The representative attended the hearing.
7.  	For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
8.  	The issue in the present case is whether the primary visa applicant meets the requirements of cl 457.223(4)(a).
Requirement for an approved nomination
9.  	Clause 457.223(4)(a) requires that there is an approved nomination of an occupation relating to the applicant by a standard business sponsor that has not ceased.
10.  	The Tribunal approved the nomination in the present case on 29 September 2021 
11.  	For that reason the requirement of cl 457.223(4)(a) is met.
12.  	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
13.  	The Tribunal remits the application for a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 457 visa:
•	cl 457.223(4)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Angela Julian-Armitage
Member

ATTACHMENT  -  claUSE 457.223 (extract)
457.223
…

Standard business sponsorship
…
(4)	The applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
(a)	each of the following applies:
(i)	a nomination of an occupation in relation to the applicant has been approved under section 140GB of the Act; 
(ii)	the nomination was made by a person who was a standard business sponsor at the time the nomination was approved; 
(iii)	the approval of the nomination has not ceased as provided for in regulation 2.75; and
(aa)	the nominated occupation is specified in an instrument in writing for paragraph 2.72 (10) (a) or (aa) that is in effect; and
(ba)	either:
(i)	the nominated occupation is specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subparagraph; or
(ii)	each of the following applies:
(A)	the applicant is employed to work in the nominated occupation; 
(B)	if the person who made the approved nomination met paragraph 2.59(d) or (e), or paragraph 2.68(e) or (f), in the person’s most recent approval as a standard business sponsor, the applicant is employed to work in a position in the person’s business or in a business of an associated entity of the person; 
(C)	if the person who made the approved nomination met paragraph 2.59(h), or paragraph 2.68(i), in the person’s most recent approval as a standard business sponsor, the applicant is employed to work in a position in the person’s business; and
(d)	the Minister is satisfied that:
(i)	the applicant’s intention to perform the occupation is genuine; and
(ii)	the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine; and
(da)	the applicant has the skills, qualifications and employment background that the Minister considers necessary to perform the tasks of the nominated occupation; and
(e)	if the Minister requires the applicant to demonstrate that he or she has the skills that are necessary to perform the occupation — the applicant demonstrates that he or she has those skills in the manner specified by the Minister; and
(eb)	if:
(i)	the applicant is not an exempt applicant; and
(ii)	subclause (6) does not apply to the applicant; 
the applicant:
(iv)	has undertaken a language test specified by the Minister in a legislative instrument for this subparagraph; and
(v)	achieved within the period specified by the Minister in the instrument, in a single attempt at the test, the score specified by the Minister in the instrument; and
(ec)	if the Minister requires the applicant to demonstrate his or her English language proficiency — the applicant demonstrates his or her English language proficiency in the manner specified by the Minister; and
(f)	either:
(i)	there is no adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the approved nomination mentioned in paragraph (a) or a person associated with that person; or
(ii)	it is reasonable to disregard any adverse information known to Immigration about the person who made the approved nomination mentioned in paragraph (a) or a person associated with that person.
…
(6)	This subclause applies to an applicant if:
(a)	the base rate of pay for the applicant, under the terms and conditions of employment about which the Minister was last satisfied for paragraph 2.72(10)(c), is at least the level of salary worked out in the way specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this paragraph; and
(b)	the Minister considers that granting a Subclass 457 visa to the applicant would be in the interests of Australia.
…
(11)	In subclause (4):
exempt applicant means an applicant who is in a class of applicants specified by the Minister in an instrument in writing for this subclause.