Bhaskar (Migration)

Case •

[2024] AATA 296

•

6 February 2024

Bhaskar (Migration) [2024] AATA 296 (6 February 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Vinaykumar Mishrilal Bhaskar

CASE NUMBER:  2312168

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2017/380805

MEMBER:Karen McNamara

DATE:6 February 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 485 visa:

·Cl 485.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

·cl 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

Statement made on 06 February 2024 at 11:09am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa – Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) – Federal Circuit and Family Court remittal – Graduate Work stream – ICT Business Analyst – Australian study requirement – Graduate Diploma in Business – ‘closely related’ to nominated occupation – determined by reference to ANZSCO – Unit Group 2611 – Minor Group 261 – Sub Major Group 26 – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 360
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), r 1.15F; Schedule 2, cls 485.221, 485.222

CASES
Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115
Tobon vs MIBP [2014] FCCA 2208

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

  1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection on 23 June 2017, to refuse to grant Mr Vinaykumar Mishrilal Bhaskar (the applicant) a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

  2. The applicant applied for the visa on 29 January 2017. Visa Class VC contains Subclass 485. (For visa applications made before 1 July 2013, there is also a Subclass 487, however that subclass is not relevant to the present matter.) The criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa are set out in Part 485 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria.

  3. Information before the Tribunal shows that on 23 June 2017, the delegate refused to grant the visa because the applicant did not satisfy cl 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because the delegate was not satisfied that the qualification of Graduate Diploma in Business is closely related to the applicant’s nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst (ANZSCO 261111).

  4. The applicant lodged an application for review with the Tribunal on 30 June 2017 (AAT reference 1714082).  The applicant appeared before the Tribunal (differently constituted) on 9 October 2018, to give evidence and present arguments. On 9 October 2018, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. The applicant subsequently sought judicial review of that decision, and on 11 July 2023, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCAFCOA) remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for reconsideration and redetermination according to law.

  5. Having consideration to the totality of evidence before it (as presently constituted), pursuant to s 360(2)(a) of the Act, the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the visa applicant on the basis of the material before it, including the l evidence given by the applicant before the previously constituted Tribunal.

  6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

    CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

  7. The applicant is seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Subclass 485 visa in the Graduate Work stream which include cl 485.221 and cl 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. These provisions require that the applicant must have satisfied the ‘Australian study requirement’ in the 6 months immediately before the day the visa application was made (cl 485.221) and secondly, unless limited circumstances apply, that each degree, diploma or trade qualification used to satisfy that requirement must be closely related to the applicant’s nominated skilled occupation (cl 485.222(1)). The issue in the present case is whether the applicant meets those requirements.

  8. Information before the Tribunal shows that at the time of application to the Department, the applicant stated that he completed the following studies in Australia:

    ·     Diploma of Business Administration attained from Strathfield College from 14 July 2009 to 25 July 2010.

    ·     Bachelor of Business (Information Systems) attained from Victoria University from 25 July 2011 to 26 July 2013.

    ·     Graduate Diploma in Business attained from Holmes Institute 11 November 2013 to 7 November 2016.

  9. Under reg 1.15F(1) of the Regulations, a person satisfies the ‘Australian study requirement’ if the person satisfies the Minister that the person has completed 1 or more degrees, diplomas or trade qualifications for award by an Australian educational institution as a result of a course or courses:

    ·that are registered courses; and

    ·that were completed in a total of at least 16 calendar months; and

    ·that were completed as a result of a total of at least 2 academic years study; and

    ·for which all instruction was conducted in English; and

    ·that the applicant undertook while in Australia as the holder of a visa authorising the applicant to study.

  10. ‘Degree’, ‘diploma’, ‘trade qualification’, ‘registered course’, ‘completed’ and ‘academic year’ are all defined terms (see regs 1.03, 1.15F and 2.26AC(6), and cl 485.111). ‘Completed’, in relation to a degree, diploma or trade qualification, means having met the academic requirements for its award (reg 1.15F(2)). For the purposes of this case, one ‘academic year’ is at least a total of 46 weeks, being the duration of a course or courses registered under the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (Cth): IMMI 09/040[1]

    [1] IMMI 09/040 states (b) 2 academic years is at least a total of 92 weeks, being the duration of a course or courses registered under s 9 of the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000

  11. At the time of application, the applicant declared he had completed the following qualifications: Graduate Diploma in Business attained from Holmes Institute from 11 November 2013 to 7 November 2016. Bachelor of Business (Information Systems) attained from Victoria University from 25 July 2011 to 26 July 2013 and Diploma of Business Administration attained from Strathfield College from 14 July 2009 to 25 July 2010. In evidence before the Tribunal the applicant has provided letters of completion and academic transcripts supporting said studies and completion dates.

  12. Having consideration as to whether the applicant completed his study in the 6 months immediately before the application was made, the Tribunal has before it a letter of completion issued by Holmes Institute on 13 December 2016 stating the applicant fulfilled the requirements for Graduate Diploma in Business on 7 November 2016. The letter was accompanied by an academic transcript stating that he commenced the course on 11 November 2013 and concluded on 7 November 2016.  

  13. The Tribunal therefore accepts this as the date that he was found to have met the academic requirements, and thus ‘completed’ the course within the meaning of reg 1.15F.

  14. Further evidence before the Tribunal confirms that the Graduate Diploma in Business is a ‘diploma’ within the meaning of reg. 2.26AC(6) and that it was undertaken at Holmes Institute which  is registered on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) to provide courses to overseas students as required by reg 1.03.

  15. The applicant undertook and completed his studies in this course between 11 November 2013 to 7 November 2016. The course was conducted in Australia and the applicant held a visa permitting the relevant study during this period.

  16. In relation to the various components of the Australian study requirement, the Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence before it that:

    ·The applicant's Graduate Diploma in Business is a Diploma within the meaning of reg 2.26AC(6);

    ·The course was a registered course within the meaning of reg 1.03;

    ·The course was completed in a total of at least 16 calendar months and as a result of at least 2 years academic study;

    ·All instruction was in English; and

    ·The course was conducted in Australia while the applicant held a visa authorising study in Australia.

  17. The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that the requirements of reg 1.15F are met. Further, the visa application was made on 29 January 2017 and the applicant completed the course on 7 November 2016, which is within the period of 6 months immediately before the date the application was made. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that the applicant satisfied the Australian study requirement within the relevant period and that the requirements of cl.485.221 are met.

    Is the qualification ‘closely related’ to the nominated occupation?

  18. In addition, cl 485.222 requires each qualification used to satisfy that requirement is closely related to the applicant’s nominated skilled occupation, unless the visa application was made in the period mentioned in paragraph 1229(3)(ka) of Schedule 1 to the Regulations. In this case, the visa application was not made during that period.

  19. The words ‘closely related’ are not defined in the legislation but they require and call attention to the connection between two things. They do not require an exact correspondence.[2] However, the relationship must be more than merely complementary.[3]

    [2] MIBP v Dhillon (2014) 227 FCR 525 at [20]; see also Constantino v MIBP [2013] FCA 1301 at [33] quoting with approval Prasad v MIAC [2012] FCA 591 at [33].

    [3] Uddin v MIAC [2010] FCA 1281 at [10]–[12] where North J rejected the argument that the Tribunal misunderstood the term ‘closely related’ by departing from what was then set out in PAM3. The Tribunal in that case found that the language of the regulation required a closer relationship than that suggested by the words ‘complementary’ or ‘useful’ as used in PAM3 at that time. This approach was followed in Prasad v MIAC [2012] FCA 591 (special leave refused: Prasad v MIAC [2013] HCASL 34) and approved in Constantino v MIBP [2013] FCA 1301 and MIBP v Dhillon (2014) 227 FCR 525 at [20]. See also Shafiuzzaman v MIAC [2011] FMCA 874 at [37]–[38] and Manik v MIAC [2012] FMCA 149 at [13], upheld on appeal Manik v MIAC [2012] FCA 619 at [19]–[20].

  20. An occupation is a ‘skilled occupation’ if: it is specified by the Minister as a skilled occupation; and, if a number of points are specified in the instrument as being available — for which the number of points are available; and that is applicable to the person in accordance with the specification of the occupation (regs 1.03 and 1.15I). The relevant instrument for this purpose is Legislative Instrument IMMI 16/059.

  21. In this case, the applicant nominated the occupation of ICT Business Analyst ANZSCO (261111) which is a skilled occupation specified in IMMI 16/059.

  22. The applicant relied on his Graduate Diploma in Business qualification, as well as his Bachelor of Business (Information Systems). There is no issue with the applicant’s Bachelor of Business (Information Systems) qualification, and the Tribunal is satisfied on the information before it, that this qualification is closely related to the nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst.

  23. In their decision dated 23 June 2017, the delegate acknowledged that the applicant had completed a Graduate Diploma in Business on 7 November 2016, stating that whilst this “may possibly assist the applicant in their future career plan, the regulation states that the course must be closely related to the applicant’s nominated skilled occupation and does not specify any assessment consideration by the Delegate towards future career plans.”

  24. After affording consideration to the ANZSCO description as defined under ANZSCO Unit Group 2611 and Unit Group 261111 (ICT Business and Systems Analysts), the delegate found that the Graduate Diploma in Business qualification is not closely related to the nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst under ANZSCO 261111.   

  25. The Tribunal notes that plentiful evidence and submissions were lodged by or on behalf of the applicant. While the Tribunal has considered all of same, only that which was considered material to its decision has been expressly referred to herein.

  26. For the applicant to satisfy cl.485.222, the qualifications relied on, must be closely related to the nominated occupation. This assessment involves comparing the study units relevant to the Graduate Diploma and of the applicant’s qualifications with the tasks at all levels of ANZSCO.

  27. To determine whether the applicant’s Graduate Diploma in Business qualification is closely related to his nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst (ANZSCO 261111), the Tribunal must take into consideration the nature of the nominated occupation be determined by reference to ANZSCO.[4]  Additionally, the ANZSCO code needs to be read as a whole with a view to identifying and applying information which is relevant to an understanding of the whole of the nominated occupation.[5] That is, it is necessary to have regard to all information that is potentially relevant, including not only the statement of tasks specified in the relevant unit group or at the lower level of the occupation itself, but also relevant information in the higher groupings into which the nominated occupation falls.[6]

    [4] See Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115. The central question in this case was not whether the nominated occupation must necessarily be determined by reference to ANZSCO, but rather whether the Tribunal had incorrectly confined its consideration to the relevant ANZSCO occupation. However, the central significance of the ANZSCO Code is implicit in the Court’s reasoning. See also Kshatry v MICMA [2022] FedCFamC2G 707 at [67] where the Court found ANZSCO is expressly adopted to apply by virtue of legislative instrument and rejected the argument that ANZSCO is not delegated legislation without the force of law. See also Setiya v MICMSMA [2021] FCCA 544 which at [37] noted the reference to ANZSCO in Column 2 of IMMI 17/072 must have some function, even if ‘Note 1’ in IMMI 17/072 suggests it is for ‘information only’ i.e. the ‘information’ the reference is intended to convey must be the specifications for that occupation in the ANZSCO code. See also Wang v MIMIA [2005] FCA 843, MIAC v Kamruzzaman [2009] FCA 1562 and Seema v MIAC (2012) 203 FCR 537 where the relevance of ASCO/ANZSCO was considered in the analogous context of whether the applicant’s employment is closely related to the nominated occupation.

    [5] Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115 at [56].

    [6] Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115 at [52]. The judgment examines the structure of the ANZSCO code in detail (at [17]–[23]).

  28. Accordingly, the Tribunal is required to consider the whole of the occupation by reference to the hierarchies under which the nominated occupation appears in the ANZSCO.

  29. The ANZSCO dictionary provides that an ICT Business Analyst (261111) ‘identifies and communicates with users to formulate and produce a requirement specification to create system and software solutions’.

  30. The occupation falls under the ANZSCO Unit Group 2611: ICT Business and Systems Analysts, which is a skill level 1 occupation and states “ICT Business and Systems Analysts work with users to formulate system requirements, develop system plans and documentation, review and evaluate systems, and design and modify systems to meet users’ business needs.”  The tasks listed under this unit group are as follows:

    • working with users to formulate and document business requirements
    • identifying, investigating, and analysing business processes, procedures and work practices
    • identifying and evaluating inefficiencies and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour
    • using project management methodologies, principles and techniques to develop project plans and to cost, resource and manage projects
    • taking responsibility for deploying functional solutions, such as creating, adopting and implementing system test plans, which ensure acceptable quality and integrity of the system
    • creating user and training documentation, and conducting formal training classes
    • developing functional specifications for use by system developers
    • using data and process modelling techniques to create clear system specifications for the design and development of system software
    • acting as a central reference and information source, providing guidance and assistance in the system project decision making process
    • consulting with users and programmers to design improvements to the functionality of websites, apps and systems.

  31. The ANZSCO Minor Group for the nominated occupation is 261 Business and Systems Analysts, and Programmers and refers to Business and Systems Analysts and Programmers “work with users to formulate system requirements, develop system plans and documentation, review and evaluate existing systems, and design and modify systems to meet users' business needs, create audio-visual applications, and develop, test and maintain code for computer applications and websites”. The tasks include:

    ·   identifying, formulating and documenting user ICT requirements

    ·   providing advice, guidance, expertise and assistance in the system project decision making process and in the development of system proposals and strategies

    ·   identifying and evaluating inefficiencies, deficiencies and limitations in existing systems and associated processes, procedures and methods, and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour

    ·   testing, debugging, diagnosing and correcting problems to ensure acceptable quality and integrity of the system, and that programs and applications perform to specification

    ·   designing and developing digital animations, imaging, presentations, games, video clips, and Internet applications using multimedia software, tools and utilities, interactive graphics and programming language

  32. The Sub-Major Group 26 (ICT Professionals) refers to ICT Professionals “perform analytical, conceptual and practical tasks which support the efficient and secure provision of information and communication technology (ICT) services to government, commercial and industrial organisations, and individuals”. Tasks include:

    ·   developing and documenting strategies, policies and procedures relating to the use of ICT technologies and services

    ·   planning, analysing, designing, developing, implementing, testing, operating, maintaining and assisting with the use of technologies and services that enable information, such as voice, image and data, to be accessed, networked, stored, processed, transformed, manipulated and transmitted over a variety of media

    ·   assessing the performance of ICT technologies and services, identifying limitations and inefficiencies, and recommending and implementing solutions

    ·   providing troubleshooting and service support in diagnosing, resolving and correcting problems associated with the use of ICT technologies and service

  33. The Major Group 2 (Professionals) refers to “Professionals perform analytical, conceptual and creative tasks through the application of theoretical knowledge and experience in the fields of the arts, media, business, design, engineering, the physical and life sciences, transport, education, health, information and communication technology, the law, social sciences and social welfare”. Tasks identified as relevant to the applicant’s business qualification and nominated occupation include:  

    ·     analysing, planning, developing and implementing programs and solutions to resolve business and economic problems

    ·     designing, implementing, testing and maintaining technologies and services that enable information to be accessed, stored, manipulated, processed, and disseminated

  1. In submissions before the Tribunal, the applicant relied upon the respective course outlines for subjects undertaken in the Graduate Diploma in Business. The subjects included the following:

    ·Statistics and Research Methods for Business Decisions

    ·Accounting for Business Decisions

    ·Management & Organisations in a Global Environment

    ·Competitive Strategy

    ·Economics for Business

    ·Finance for Business

  2. The course outlines provide an individual overview of the respective subjects, explanation of the rationale for the subject and identified the objectives and learning outcomes. The Tribunal notes from the applicant’s academic transcript that two exemptions were granted for the subjects Marketing Management and Leveraging IT for Business Advantage, in recognition of past studies.

  3. The applicant submits that by reference to ANZSCO, that the occupation of ICT Business Analyst involves more of the management tasks in addition to the tasks related to the ICT. The applicant referred to the different subjects undertaken and how the knowledge attained assists him in undertaking specific tasks under ANZSCO including analysing business and financial needs and how the different subjects assist him in his job.

  4. The Tribunal acknowledges that the applicant’s claims appear consistent with the approach taken in Tobon v MIBP[7] which held that for a qualification to be closely related to an applicant’s nominated skilled occupation, the decision maker must be satisfied that the study or training for which the qualification was granted conferred on an applicant skills, all, or a substantial proportion of which, fall or falls within the set of skills associated with the carrying on of the occupation.[8]  

    [7] Tobon vs MIBP [2014] FCCA 2208

    [8] Tobon v MIBP [2014] FCCA 2208 at [25].

  5. It was proposed in Tobon that in order to determine in any given case whether a qualification is closely related to an applicant’s nominated skilled occupation, the decision maker must undertake the following steps:

    First, they must identify the study or training for which the diploma was granted, and the skills acquired as a result of such study or training (‘acquired skills’);

    Second, they must identify the set of skills that are associated with carrying on the nominated skilled occupation (‘nominated skills’); and

    Third, they must determine whether all or a substantial proportion of the acquired skills are nominated skills. If the decision maker so determines, the diploma is closely related to the nominated skilled occupation.[9]

    [9] Tobon v MIBP [2014] FCCA 2208 at [25].

  6. However, this approach does not appear to have been endorsed by the Full Court in Talha, where the Court expressed reservation as to whether the third step is necessary and cautioned against being too prescriptive by substituting a formula for the terms of the provision.[10]

    [10] Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115.

  7. The Court also clarified that the findings in Tobon ought not to be read as derogating from the fundamental requirement that in conducting the evaluative exercise required by the criterion, consideration must be given to the whole of the Australian studies and the whole of the nominated skilled occupation.[11]

    [11] In Walia v MIBP [2015] FCCA 1949 the applicant argued unsuccessfully, with reference to Tobon v MIBP [2014] FCCA 2208, that the Tribunal had applied the wrong test in regard to whether her qualification (Diploma of Business Management) was ‘closely related’ to her nominated skilled occupation (pastry cook). It was submitted that the correct test was as stated in Tobon. The Court did not express any view as to the correctness or otherwise of Tobon, but in rejecting the applicant’s contention, it referred to MIBP v Dhillon (2014) 227 FCR 525 as the leading authority on the issue.

  8. As guided by the Court in Talha, when evaluating whether a qualification is ‘closely related’ to the nominated occupation, the Tribunal is required to consider the whole of the applicant’s studies and the whole of the nominated skilled occupation.

  9. At first view, qualifications in business and the occupation of ICT Business Analyst (as described in ANZSCO), do not appear to be intrinsically related. ANZSCO occupation 261111 indicates that Business Analysts (ICT) “identifies and communicates with users to formulate and produce a requirement specification to create system and software solutions.’

  10. Unit Group 2611 indicates ICT Business and Systems Analysts work with users to formulate system requirements, develop system plans and documentation, review and evaluate systems, and design and modify systems to meet users’ business needs.” 

  11. Minor Group 261 indicates ICT Business and System Analysts and Programmers, work with users to formulate system requirements, develop system plans and documentation, review and evaluate existing systems, and design and modify systems to meet users' business needs, create audiovisual applications, and develop, test and maintain code for computer applications and websites”.  

  12. There are tasks however listed under Unit Group 2611 and Minor Group 261 which appear to be closely related to the applicant’s business qualifications. These tasks include:

    • working with users to formulate and document business requirements
    • identifying, investigating, and analysing business processes, procedures and work practices
    • identifying and evaluating inefficiencies and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour
    • using project management methodologies, principles and techniques to develop project plans and to cost, resource and manage projects

    ·providing advice, guidance, expertise and assistance in the system project decision making process and in the development of system proposals and strategies

    ·identifying and evaluating inefficiencies, deficiencies and limitations in existing systems and associated processes, procedures and methods, and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour

  13. Sub-major Group 26 indicates that ICT Professionals “perform analytical, conceptual and practical tasks which support the efficient and secure provision of information and communication technology (ICT) services to government, commercial and industrial organisations, and individuals”. Tasks which appear to be closely related to the applicant’s business qualifications include:

    ·   developing and documenting strategies, policies and procedures relating to the use of ICT technologies and services

  14. Unit Group 2611, Minor Group 261 and Sub Major Group 26 are Skill level 1 occupations which, in Australia require a Bachelor degree or higher, or at least five years of relevant experience.

  15. Tasks listed under Major Group 2 (Professionals) are broader in nature and appear to have a closer link to the applicant’s business studies. Major Group 2 refers to “Professionals perform analytical, conceptual and creative tasks through the application of theoretical knowledge and experience in the fields of the arts, media, business, design, engineering, the physical and life sciences, transport, education, health, information and communication technology, the law, social sciences and social welfare” [emphasis added by Tribunal]. Tasks which appear to be closely related to the applicant’s business qualifications include:

    ·     analysing, planning, developing and implementing programs and solutions to resolve business and economic problems.

    ·     designing, implementing, testing and maintaining technologies and services that enable information to be accessed, stored, manipulated, processed, and disseminated.

  16. The indicative skills level for Major Group 2 occupations includes Skill level 2, which in Australia require an AQF Associate degree, Advanced Diploma or Diploma or at least three years of relevant experience.

  17. In considering the whole of the applicant’s studies in Graduate Diploma in Business, the Tribunal formed the view that the qualifications are not inextricably connected to the occupation of ICT Business Analyst, which (as described in ANZSCO) involves “identifies and communicates with users to formulate and produce a requirement specification to create system and software solutions’.

  18. Given the Full Federal Court authority in Talha regarding the correct approach when assessing whether the applicant’s qualifications are ‘closely related’, the Tribunal has had regard to all relevant information (including tasks) in the whole of the ANZSCO groupings.

  19. Having afforded consideration to the whole of the ANZSCO groupings within which the occupation of ICT Business Analyst falls, there appears to be a correlation between the applicant’s Business qualifications and the descriptions in the ANZSCO. The tasks considered by the Tribunal to be closely related to the applicant’s business qualifications (as contained in the whole of the ANZSCO groupings) include:

    • working with users to formulate and document business requirements
    • identifying, investigating, and analysing business processes, procedures and work practices
    • identifying and evaluating inefficiencies and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour
    • using project management methodologies, principles and techniques to develop project plans and to cost, resource and manage projects

    ·providing advice, guidance, expertise and assistance in the system project decision making process and in the development of system proposals and strategies

    ·identifying and evaluating inefficiencies, deficiencies and limitations in existing systems and associated processes, procedures and methods, and recommending optimal business practices, and system functionality and behaviour

    ·developing and documenting strategies, policies and procedures relating to the use of ICT technologies and services

    ·analysing, planning, developing and implementing programs and solutions to resolve business and economic problems.

    ·designing, implementing, testing and maintaining technologies and services that enable information to be accessed, stored, manipulated, processed, and disseminated.

  20. Following the guidance in Talha, the Tribunal is satisfied that, when considering the applicant’s business qualifications (as a whole) and comparing them to the whole of the nominated occupation ANZCO groupings, the applicant’s Australian studies are closely related to the nominated occupation of ICT Business Analyst.

  21. As each qualification used to satisfy the Australian study requirement is closely related to the nominated skilled occupation, the applicant meets cl. 485.222

  22. On the basis of the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the applicant meets the requirements of cl 485.221 and 485.222. The appropriate course is to remit the visa application to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for the visa.

    DECISION

  23. The Tribunal remits the application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 485 visa:

    ·cl 485.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

    ·cl 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Karen McNamara
    Member



Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

15

Statutory Material Cited

0

Constantino v MIBP [2013] FCA 1301
Prasad v MIAC [2012] FCA 591
Uddin v MIAC [2010] FCA 1281