Kumar (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) – Post-Study Work stream, made by Mr. Kumar. The central dispute concerned whether Mr. Kumar had satisfied the Australian study requirement within the prescribed timeframe before lodging his visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr. Kumar met the criteria for the visa, specifically whether he had satisfied the Australian study requirement within the six months immediately preceding his visa application, as stipulated by clause 485.231(3)(a) of the Regulations. The Tribunal also considered the alternative timeframe provision in clause 485.231(3)(b), which allows for a 12-month period if the applicant was outside Australia during a specific period, and whether Mr. Kumar's qualification was conferred by a specified educational institution.

The Tribunal found that Mr. Kumar held a Master of Interaction Design and Electronic Arts, a qualification specified by the Minister, and that it was conferred by The University of Sydney, also a specified institution. However, the critical issue was the date of completion of his studies. While the university initially stated the applicant "completed the requirements" as of 12 May 2021, further correspondence confirmed this as the date he "met the academic requirement of the course." The Tribunal noted that the applicant's visa application was lodged after this date, and the alternative timeframe provision did not apply as he was not outside Australia during the relevant period.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the applicant meets criterion cl 485.231 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, indicating that further consideration of the remaining visa criteria was necessary.