Singh (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Subclass 485 visa in the Graduate Work stream. The applicant's eligibility for this visa was contested, specifically concerning whether they met the requirements of clauses 485.221 and 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. These clauses mandate that an applicant must have satisfied the 'Australian study requirement' in the six months preceding their visa application and that each qualification used to meet this requirement must be closely related to their nominated skilled occupation.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's completed courses were sufficiently related to their nominated occupation of Motor Mechanic (General) to satisfy the visa criteria. The applicant expressed a future desire to own a garage and learn business techniques, but struggled to articulate a direct connection between undertaking an Advanced Diploma of Business and their nominated trade. The applicant also indicated a misunderstanding regarding the timeframe for submitting the visa application after completing an automotive course.

The Tribunal reviewed the applicant's academic history, which included several automotive and business qualifications. The most recent qualification, an Advanced Diploma of Business completed in December 2016, comprised modules such as developing advertising campaigns, managing knowledge, and implementing strategic plans. The Tribunal found that these business-focused modules, and the qualification as a whole, were not closely related to the nominated occupation of Motor Mechanic (General). Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, as the applicant failed to meet the essential requirements for the visa subclass.