Pescadero (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa in the Graduate Work stream. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the primary criteria for this visa, specifically clause 485.223 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which pertains to the applicant's skills assessment in relation to their nominated skilled occupation.

The core legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence that, at the time of lodging their visa application, they had applied for a skills assessment for their nominated skilled occupation from the relevant assessing authority, as required by clause 485.223. The applicant had nominated "Engineering Technologist" but later provided a skills assessment for "Electrical Engineering Draftsperson," admitting to mistakenly nominating the wrong occupation.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant did provide a skills assessment from Engineers Australia, it was for an occupation different from the one nominated in their visa application. The applicant's subsequent admission of nominating the incorrect occupation and providing a signed notification of incorrect answers did not rectify the initial deficiency. The Tribunal concluded that the visa application, as originally lodged, was not accompanied by evidence of an application for a skills assessment for the *nominated* skilled occupation by the relevant assessing authority. Consequently, the applicant failed to satisfy the requirements of clause 485.223.

As the applicant did not meet the primary criteria for the visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visas to the applicant and any secondary applicants.