Vashisth (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Rahul Vashisth against a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal regarding his application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, specifically the Subclass 485 Temporary Graduate visa under the Post-Study Work stream. The central dispute revolved around whether Mr Vashisth had satisfied the Australian study requirement as stipulated by clause 485.231 of the Migration Regulations 1994. The case was heard by Warren Stooke AM.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether Mr Vashisth had completed his Master of Data Science course in the six months immediately preceding his visa application, thereby meeting the Australian study requirement. This involved interpreting the meaning of "completed" in the context of academic requirements and the relevant regulations.

The Tribunal considered evidence including a transcript from La Trobe University indicating a course finish date of 12 March 2020, and a letter from the university's Deputy Director of Academic Services. This letter clarified that while the final subject result was recorded on 12 March 2020, Mr Vashisth was officially deemed to have passed the course on 17 March 2020, after final checks. Applying the principle established in *Venkatesan v MIAC* [2008] FMCA 409, which defines course completion as achieving the necessary results to be awarded the degree, the Tribunal found that the administrative steps following the academic completion did not negate the fact that Mr Vashisth had met the academic requirements.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Vashisth met the criterion under clause 485.231. The matter was remitted to the Minister for reconsideration of the visa application, with the direction that the applicant had satisfied this specific criterion.