CHEN (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Graduate Work stream, Subclass 485. The applicant's eligibility for this visa was contested, specifically concerning whether she met the requirements for the Australian study requirement and the close relationship between her qualifications and her nominated occupation.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant satisfied the ‘Australian study requirement’ as defined by the Migration Regulations 1994, which involves completing registered courses in Australia for a minimum duration and under specific conditions. Secondly, the Tribunal had to ascertain whether each of the degrees, diplomas, or trade qualifications relied upon to meet the Australian study requirement were ‘closely related’ to the applicant’s nominated skilled occupation, as stipulated by clause 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant had completed several courses in Australia, including a Master of International Business, a Graduate Diploma in Professional Accounting, and an Advanced Diploma of Translating, the crucial element was the relationship between these qualifications and her nominated occupation. The applicant nominated an Accountant (General) position. The Tribunal found that the Advanced Diploma of Translating, despite being a completed qualification, was not closely related to the nominated occupation of Accountant (General). Consequently, the applicant failed to satisfy clause 485.222, which mandates that all qualifications used to meet the Australian study requirement must be closely related to the nominated occupation.

As the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.