KARIYAWASAM (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Kariyawasam for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485, in the Graduate Work stream. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Kariyawasam satisfied clause 485.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which is a primary criterion for this visa subclass. This criterion relates to the applicant's skills in relation to their nominated skilled occupation.

The central legal issue was whether Mr Kariyawasam's visa application was accompanied by the requisite evidence of a skills assessment. Specifically, clause 485.223 mandates that at the time of application, evidence must be provided that the applicant has applied for a skills assessment for their nominated occupation from a relevant assessing authority. The Tribunal considered the definitions of "skilled occupation" and "relevant assessing authority" as provided in the Regulations and relevant legislative instruments.

The Tribunal found that Mr Kariyawasam had nominated the occupation of Computer Network and Systems Engineer, which is a specified skilled occupation, and the Australian Computer Society is the relevant assessing authority for this occupation. However, the evidence before the Tribunal indicated that Mr Kariyawasam had declared he had not applied for a skills assessment with the relevant authority when lodging his application. Mr Kariyawasam later stated to the Tribunal that he had selected the incorrect visa stream, nominating the Graduate Work stream instead of the Post-Study Work stream. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the application was not accompanied by the required evidence of a skills assessment application for the nominated occupation.

As Mr Kariyawasam failed to satisfy clause 485.223, he did not meet the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr Kariyawasam the visa.