Zhang (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) by Ms Zhang. The core dispute revolved around whether Ms Zhang satisfied the Australian study requirement, a prerequisite for the visa. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was tasked with determining this issue.

The Tribunal was required to consider whether Ms Zhang had met the Australian study requirement as defined by regulation 1.15F(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether she had completed registered courses in Australia, undertaken over a specified period and duration, with instruction in English, while holding a study-authorising visa. The Tribunal also needed to determine if the qualifications obtained were closely related to her nominated skilled occupation, as required by clause 485.222.

The Tribunal noted that Ms Zhang had initially failed to respond to a natural justice letter within the stipulated timeframe due to a misunderstanding. Consequently, a scheduled hearing was cancelled, but the Tribunal invited written submissions, which Ms Zhang's representative subsequently provided. These submissions included a testamur from her course provider, Supreme Business College Pty Ltd, which confirmed the actual end date of her studies. The Tribunal found that, despite the initial delay and the CRICOS registration incorrectly recording a shorter duration, the evidence, particularly the testamur, established that Ms Zhang had completed 89 weeks of study, satisfying the requirement for at least 92 weeks of study. The Tribunal also found that the qualification was closely related to her nominated occupation.

Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that Ms Zhang met the criteria under clauses 485.221 and 485.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The Tribunal remitted the application to the Minister for reconsideration of the remaining visa criteria.