Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd and Australian Skills Quality Authority

This matter concerned an application by Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd for an extension of time to lodge an appeal with the Tribunal against a decision by the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA). ASQA had rejected Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd's application for registration as a Registered Training Organisation (RTO) under the *National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Act 2011* (NVR Act). The application for an extension of time was heard by Dr L Bygrave, Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd an extension of time to lodge its appeal. This required the Tribunal to consider the explanation for the delay, any prejudice to ASQA and the general public, and crucially, the merits of the substantive application. The substantive application concerned whether Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd met the requirements for registration as an RTO under the NVR Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that it must consider the merits of the substantive application when deciding whether to grant an extension of time. The evidence indicated that Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd had applied for RTO registration on 14 December 2017, and following an audit on 4 April 2018, ASQA had identified non-compliance with several clauses of the Standards. Despite requests for further information and the submission of rectification material on 7 September 2018, ASQA's final audit report on 17 December 2018 confirmed ongoing non-compliance. The Tribunal found no additional information supporting the contention that Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd was likely to meet the requirements for registration. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that its role was not to provide advice to enable the applicant to remedy its situation, and that Prestige Technical Training Institute Pty Ltd could lodge a fresh application without detriment. Consequently, the limited merits of the substantive application weighed against granting an extension of time.

The Tribunal concluded that, taking into account all the evidence, it was not satisfied that it was reasonable in the circumstances to grant an extension of time. Accordingly, the application for an extension of time was refused.