Kohler Holma (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed the Department's decision to refuse a Skilled Independent (Permanent) visa (subclass 189) to the applicant, Kohler Holma. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of competent English language proficiency at the time of her invitation to apply for the visa, as required by regulation 1.15C of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant had satisfied the requirements of regulation 1.15C, which stipulated specific methods for demonstrating competent English. The applicant had submitted a letter from the English Language Company and a certificate of "Excellence in Teaching" English, neither of which were recognised by the regulation. While the applicant later completed an IELTS test, this was done outside the three-year timeframe mandated by regulation 1.15C prior to the application lodgement date.

The Tribunal reasoned that it was bound by the strict requirements of regulation 1.15C and had no discretion to overlook non-compliance, even if the applicant's overall English proficiency was evident. The English Language Company test was not listed as a valid method of demonstrating competence under the regulation, and the IELTS test, though successfully completed, was lodged outside the prescribed time limit. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Department's decision, finding that the applicant had failed to meet the regulatory requirements for demonstrating competent English.