Kaur (Migration) [2019] AATA 4606 (21 October 2019)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANTS: Ms Manmeet Kaur
Mr Paviter Puneet Singh NijjarCASE NUMBER: 1826093
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S): BCC2018/2804399
MEMBER:Danielle Galvin
DATE:21 October 2019
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicants Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas.
Statement made on 21 October 2019 at 9:40am
STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 29 August 2018 to refuse to grant the applicants Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicants applied for the visas on 26 July 2018. Visa Class VC contains Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate). The criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa are set out in Part 485 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations), including criteria in different streams. In this case, the applicant is seeking to meet the criteria in the Post-Study Work stream, which includes cl.485.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
The delegate refused to grant the visas because the first named applicant (the applicant) did not satisfy cl.485.231 because the applicant had claimed to have studied a Masters of Professional Accounting at Edith Cowan University (the University) from 22 November 2017 to 24 July 2018. However, the letter of completion provided from that University lists the completion date as 8 August 2018. Consequently the completion date was later than the application date the delegate found that the Masters degree was not completed within the period of six months ending immediately before the day the application was made and therefore the requirements of r.485.231(3) were not met. Therefore the criteria for the grant of a Temporary Graduate (Post-Study Work) visa in the Post-Study Work stream were not met by the applicant and the visa applications were refused.
The Department was in receipt of the following documents:
·The visa ;
·A complete disclosure police checks;
·Copies of passport extracts;
·Marriage certificate;
·Secondary education results;
·University results from Panjab University;
·Certificate of achievement in English;
·IELTS test report form dated 31 August 2017;
·Medibank details;
·Letter dated 10 August 2018 from the University confirming that the applicant’s course was conducted in English and that the applicant had completed all requirements for the course. The letter noted that the course commenced on 27 February 2017 and was completed on 8 August 2018.The letter notes the CRICOS CODE AS 079124B, the course being L97, Master of Professional Accounting.;
·Applicant’s birth certificate;
·Academic transcript for Curtain University dated 7 February 2017;
·The university’s full unit history for the applicant;
·The University’s confirmation of enrolment for the applicant.
On 4 June 2019 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant inviting them to comment on or respond to the information that the course was completed, according to the University, on 8 August 2018. A response was required by…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Kaur (Migration) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] AATA 4606
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Tribunal was required to determine if Ms Kaur held a qualification specified by the Minister, awarded by a specified educational institution, and if her study for that qualification satisfied the Australian study requirement. This involved interpreting the definition of "completed" in relation to a qualification, which means meeting the academic requirements for its award, and the duration of an "academic year" as defined by legislative instruments.
The Tribunal found that Ms Kaur held a Master of Professional Accounting from Edith Cowan University, both of which were specified in the relevant ministerial instruments. The core of the dispute concerned the timing of the completion of her studies. While Ms Kaur had met the academic requirements for her degree, the formal conferral of the qualification was delayed due to a deferred examination and subsequent ratification by a Board of Examiners. The Tribunal concluded that "completion" for the purposes of the Australian study requirement refers to the satisfaction of academic requirements, not necessarily the formal conferral date. However, the specific timing of Ms Kaur's completion relative to her visa application date meant she did not satisfy the requirement that her study be completed in the six months immediately before the application was made.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Ms Kaur the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa. The Tribunal also noted that a secondary visa applicant, who was not a member of the family unit of a Subclass 485 visa holder, also did not meet the criteria for their visa application.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.