Azam (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a dispute concerning a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa, applied for by Mr. Azam. The core of the disagreement revolved around which stream of the Subclass 485 visa Mr. Azam had intended to apply for, specifically whether it was the Graduate Work stream or the Post-Study Work stream.

The Tribunal was required to determine the factual question of which visa stream Mr. Azam had applied for, given that he claimed to have mistakenly selected the Graduate Work stream when he met the criteria for the Post-Study Work stream. This determination was crucial because, as established in *Singh v MICMSMA* [2020] FCA 774, an applicant cannot change visa streams once an application is lodged. The Tribunal also needed to assess whether Mr. Azam met the requirements of clause 485.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which pertains to holding a specified qualification awarded by a specified educational institution and satisfying the Australian study requirement within a particular timeframe.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged the authority that streams cannot be changed post-lodgement but emphasised that the initial application stream is a question of fact. After considering the applicant's evidence and explanation at the hearing, the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr. Azam's intention was to apply for the Post-Study Work stream and that his completion of studies was geared towards this objective. The Tribunal found that Mr. Azam had substantially complied with the visa application form for the Post-Study Work stream and that he met the criteria outlined in clause 485.231, including holding a specified qualification from a specified institution and satisfying the Australian study requirement.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with the direction that Mr. Azam satisfies the criterion under clause 485.231.