Sachdeva (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa in the Graduate Work stream. The applicant's eligibility for this visa depended on meeting the 'Australian study requirement' and having qualifications closely related to their nominated skilled occupation. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had satisfied the Australian study requirement.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant met the criteria for the 'Australian study requirement' as defined by regulation 1.15F(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This requirement mandates the completion of one or more registered courses in Australia, undertaken while holding a study-authorised visa, over a total duration of at least 16 calendar months and involving at least two academic years of study, with all instruction conducted in English.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant sought to rely on two completed courses: a Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice and a Master of Laws. The registered duration of the Graduate Diploma was 24 weeks, and the Master of Laws was 52 weeks, totalling 76 weeks. The Tribunal noted that for the purposes of the 'Australian study requirement', one academic year is equivalent to at least 46 weeks. As the applicant's total registered course duration of 76 weeks fell short of the required two academic years (92 weeks), the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied this criterion.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. The decision under review, which affirmed the refusal of the visa, was therefore affirmed by the Tribunal.