Suarez Vera (Migration)

Case

[2022] AATA 1225

16 February 2022


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Suarez Vera (Migration) [2022] AATA 1225 [2022] AATA 1225 16 February 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485, in the Graduate Work stream. The applicant sought to satisfy the primary criteria for the visa, specifically clauses 485.221 and 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the requirements of these clauses, which relate to satisfying the Australian study requirement within six months prior to the visa application and having qualifications closely related to the nominated occupation.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had satisfied the Australian study requirement as defined by regulation 1.15F(1) of the Regulations. This involved assessing whether the applicant had completed one or more registered degrees, diplomas, or trade qualifications awarded by an Australian educational institution, undertaken while in Australia on a study-authorised visa, completed in a total of at least 16 calendar months, and resulting from at least two academic years of study, with all instruction conducted in English. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the qualifications relied upon were completed within the six months immediately preceding the visa application date and whether they were closely related to the applicant's nominated skilled occupation.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had completed a Diploma of Project Management and an Advanced Diploma of Program Management from the Universal Institute of Technology. These qualifications were registered courses completed at a CRICOS registered institution. The Tribunal was satisfied that both courses were completed within the six months immediately before the visa application date, with the Advanced Diploma being completed on 13 August 2019 and the application lodged on 30 August 2019. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of both clause 485.221 and clause 485.222. The Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with the direction that the applicant had met these specific criteria.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Statutory Construction

  • Remedies

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0

Pico Meneses (Migration) [2020] AATA 6070