Cuesta Moreno (Migration)

Case

[2021] AATA 1650

19 March 2021


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Cuesta Moreno (Migration) [2021] AATA 1650 [2021] AATA 1650 19 March 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Cuesta Moreno for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485, in the Graduate Work stream. The applicant nominated Chemical Engineer as her skilled occupation and sought to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa, specifically clauses 485.221 and 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. These clauses require the applicant to have satisfied the 'Australian study requirement' in the six months prior to her visa application and that each qualification used to meet this requirement must be closely related to her nominated occupation.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met these two crucial requirements. Specifically, it needed to assess if the applicant had completed sufficient study to satisfy the 'Australian study requirement' as defined by regulation 1.15F(1), which involves completing registered courses totalling at least 16 calendar months and at least two academic years of study, conducted in English, while holding a visa authorising study in Australia. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant's qualifications, a Diploma and an Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management, were 'closely related' to her nominated occupation of Chemical Engineer.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided evidence of completing a Diploma of Leadership and Management (52 weeks) and an Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management (49 weeks). While both courses were registered, conducted in English, and undertaken in Australia, the Tribunal noted that the minimum requirement for two academic years of study equated to at least 92 weeks. It concluded that relying solely on the Advanced Diploma would not satisfy the 'Australian study requirement'. However, the Tribunal ultimately found that the applicant did meet the requirements of both cl.485.221 and cl.485.222.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with the direction that the applicant meets the specified criteria under cl.485.221 and cl.485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Jurisdiction

  • Statutory Construction

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

1

Vergel Osorio (Migration) [2022] AATA 5206
Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

0

Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115
Constantino v MIBP [2013] FCA 1301
Talha v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 115