Angkasa (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485, before the Tribunal. The applicant had nominated the occupation of Chef. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had met the requirements of clause 485.224(1) of the Regulations, which mandates a skills assessment by a relevant authority as suitable for the nominated occupation within the preceding three years, with the assessment period not having expired.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's skills assessment for the nominated occupation of Chef met the criteria stipulated in clause 485.224(1) and, if so, what the appropriate course of action should be. The relevant assessing authority for a Chef was identified as Trades Recognition Australia (TRA). The applicant had initially failed to provide evidence of the skills assessment outcome within the Department's specified timeframe.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant had initially failed to provide the necessary documentation, subsequent evidence submitted to the Tribunal confirmed a skills assessment by TRA completed on 21 November 2019. This assessment was within the three-year period preceding the application and there was no indication that its validity period had ended. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of clause 485.224(1).

Given that the applicant now met this specific criterion, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate course was to remit the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria. The Tribunal directed that for the purpose of reconsideration, the applicant was to be considered as having met clause 485.224(1) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.