Nguyen (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the applications of Mr. Nguyen and his family members for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate). The primary dispute concerned whether Mr. Nguyen satisfied the Australian study requirement and whether his completed qualification was closely related to his nominated occupation. A secondary issue arose regarding the jurisdiction over a third applicant, Master Cao Thang Nguyen, who had become an Australian citizen.

The Tribunal was required to determine two key legal issues. Firstly, whether Mr. Nguyen met the criteria for satisfying the Australian study requirement, specifically that he completed his qualification within six months immediately preceding his visa application. Secondly, the Tribunal had to assess whether the degree, diploma, or trade qualification used to satisfy the Australian study requirement was "closely related" to Mr. Nguyen's nominated skilled occupation.

The Tribunal found that Mr. Nguyen had indeed completed his Master of Global Project Management (Advanced) within the six months prior to his visa application, thus satisfying clause 485.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. However, the critical question of whether this qualification was "closely related" to his nominated occupation as a software engineer remained to be determined. The Tribunal noted that the relationship between the qualification and the occupation must be more than merely complementary, and that previous courses undertaken by Mr. Nguyen had included project management subjects. The Tribunal also observed that project management tasks formed a significant part of the nominated occupation. Regarding the third applicant, the Tribunal determined it had no jurisdiction to review his application as he had acquired Australian citizenship.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the applications for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the first applicant, Mr. Nguyen, be considered to meet both clause 485.221 and clause 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, indicating that the assessment of the "closely related" requirement was to be undertaken during the reconsideration. The Tribunal explicitly stated it had no jurisdiction concerning the third applicant.