Wong (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa under the Direct Entry stream. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the criteria for the nominated occupation of Financial Investment Adviser, as the applicant was not yet fully qualified, licensed, or registered to perform the role.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 187.212 of the Migration Regulations, which requires that the nominated position will provide the applicant with the employment referred to in the related nomination application. This involved determining if the applicant's current role and qualifications met the requirements for a Financial Investment Adviser, particularly in light of more stringent occupation requirements introduced after the application was lodged.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant was performing some duties related to financial advice, he was not yet fully qualified and remained unlicensed and unregistered as a Financial Investment Adviser at the time of application and at the date of the hearing. The ANZSCO classification for this occupation indicates a Skill Level 1, typically requiring a bachelor's degree or higher, with licensing or registration potentially being a requirement. Although the applicant argued that licensing was not a requirement at the time of his application in January 2018, the Tribunal noted that the occupation's requirements had become more stringent, and the applicant did not meet the criteria for the nominated occupation as it stood at the time of the decision.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Subclass 187 visa, as the applicant had failed to satisfy the essential criteria for the Direct Entry stream.