1609077 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Subclass 485 visa in the Graduate Work stream, brought before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant sought to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa, specifically clauses 485.223 and 485.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which relate to the applicant's skills in relation to their nominated skilled occupation. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had met these specific requirements.

The Tribunal was required to determine two key legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant's visa application, as lodged, was accompanied by evidence of an application for a skills assessment by a relevant assessing authority for their nominated skilled occupation. Secondly, the Tribunal had to ascertain whether the applicant's skills had been assessed as suitable for the nominated occupation by a relevant assessing authority within the preceding three years, and if any validity period for that assessment had expired. A further consideration was whether the skills assessment was based on a qualification obtained in Australia while the applicant held a student visa.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had nominated the occupation of 'Dental Technicians', which is a specified skilled occupation, and that Trades Recognition Australia (TRA) was the relevant assessing authority. Evidence before the Tribunal indicated that the applicant had applied for a skills assessment from TRA at the time of application, satisfying clause 485.223. Regarding clause 485.224, the Tribunal found that the applicant possessed a skills assessment issued by TRA for 'Dental Technician', dated 23 June 2016, which had been validated and was within its validity period. Crucially, the Tribunal confirmed, by reference to the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) database, that the applicant's Diploma of Dental Technology was a registered course. As this qualification was obtained while the applicant held a student visa, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the additional requirement under clause 485.224(2).

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant met the requirements of clauses 485.223 and 485.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration, with the direction that these specific criteria had been met, allowing for the assessment of the remaining criteria for the visa.