Mehmood (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Mr. Mehmood for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, specifically a Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa in the Graduate Work stream. The applicant sought to have a decision affirmed that he did not meet the criteria for this visa. The central dispute concerned whether Mr. Mehmood satisfied the ‘Australian study requirement’ and whether his completed courses were closely related to his nominated skilled occupation of Chef.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. First, whether the applicant had satisfied the ‘Australian study requirement’ as defined by regulation 1.15F(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates completion of registered courses totalling at least 16 calendar months and at least two academic years of study, conducted in English, undertaken in Australia on a study-authorised visa. Second, the Tribunal had to assess whether each degree, diploma, or trade qualification relied upon to satisfy this requirement was closely related to the applicant’s nominated occupation of Chef, as required by clause 485.222.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had provided evidence of several qualifications, including a Diploma of Hospitality and an Advanced Diploma of Work Health and Safety. However, the applicant’s nominated occupation was Chef, and he had obtained a Skills Assessment from Trades Recognition Australia. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the courses he completed were closely related to the occupation of Chef. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant’s most recent qualification, an Advanced Diploma of Business, was completed on 5 October 2018, and his visa application was made shortly thereafter. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not completed the course immediately preceding his visa application, which was a prerequisite for satisfying the Australian study requirement under clause 485.221.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. As this was the only relevant visa subclass in question, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.