Singh (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr Singh, who sought review of a decision not to grant him a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, specifically a Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa. The core of the dispute concerned whether Mr Singh met the primary criteria for this visa, which relate to his skills and nominated occupation.

The Tribunal was required to determine two key issues. Firstly, whether the applicant had provided evidence of applying for a skills assessment for his nominated occupation by a relevant assessing authority at the time of his visa application. Secondly, and crucially, whether the applicant's skills had been assessed as suitable for his nominated occupation by a relevant assessing authority within the preceding three years.

The Tribunal found that while Mr Singh had provided evidence of applying for a skills assessment for the nominated occupation of Lift Mechanic, satisfying the first criterion, he had not been assessed as suitable for that specific occupation. Instead, the evidence before the Tribunal was a skills assessment for the occupation of Electrical Engineering Technician. Mr Singh contended that this discrepancy arose from errors made by his migration agent, who had nominated Lift Mechanic when Electrical Engineering Technician should have been nominated. However, the Tribunal applied the principle that the applicant must satisfy the criteria as presented in their application, and the assessment provided was for a different occupation than the one nominated.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Singh did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. The decision under review, which refused the visa, was therefore affirmed.