RAZZAQ v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, Aamir Razzaq, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) which affirmed a delegate's refusal to grant him a Temporary Graduate (Class VC) (Subclass 485) visa. The applicant had nominated bricklayer as his occupation and relied on a Diploma of Work Health and Safety to satisfy the Australian study requirement. The delegate and subsequently the Tribunal found that this qualification was not "closely related" to the nominated occupation, as required by clause 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. The proceeding was brought in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia under section 476(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), requiring the applicant to demonstrate jurisdictional error by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the Tribunal had committed jurisdictional error by failing to take into account a relevant consideration, and whether the Tribunal had failed to properly determine that the applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 485.222. Specifically, the applicant contended that the Tribunal erred in its conclusion that his Diploma of Work Health and Safety was not closely related to the occupation of a bricklayer. The Court was tasked with determining if the Tribunal's assessment of the relationship between the qualification and the occupation was illogical, irrational, or otherwise amounted to a failure to consider mandatory relevant considerations.

The Court reasoned that the applicant had failed to identify any specific relevant consideration that the Tribunal had overlooked. It found that the Tribunal had methodically considered the relevant criteria, including clause 485.221 and 485.222 of the Regulations, and had examined the applicant's evidence, the course content of the Diploma of Work Health and Safety, and the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) entry for bricklayer. The Court noted that the Tribunal's evaluative task of determining whether a qualification is "closely related" to an occupation involves a broad scope and requires comparing the whole of the qualification with the whole of the occupation. The Tribunal concluded that the Diploma of Work Health and Safety was designed for practitioners in that field, rather than for those applying such principles as part of a trade occupation like bricklaying, and that this conclusion was open to it on the evidence.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the applicant's application. The Court ordered that the first respondent's name be changed to "Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs" and that the applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed at $4,500.