Skilled Visa Refused Because the Skills Assessment Was Expired or Invalid at Invitation
A positive skills assessment is not enough if it was not legally valid at the time of invitation. For points-tested skilled visas, the Migration Regulations impose specific rules about the assessment that must exist when the applicant is invited.
For Subclass 189 and 190, the current Regulations require the relevant assessing authority to have assessed the applicant’s skills as suitable for the nominated occupation at the time of invitation. The assessment must not be one issued for a Subclass 485 purpose, and validity rules apply where the assessing authority specifies an expiry period.
The three-year rule can be misunderstood
The Regulations contain an important qualification. If an assessment specifies a validity period that ends no more than three years after the assessment date, that stated period must not have ended at invitation. In other cases, the Regulations generally require that no more than three years have passed since the assessment date. Applicants should not assume every positive assessment remains usable indefinitely.
Common refusal problems
- the skills assessment had expired before the invitation date;
- the assessment was more than three years old and no longer satisfied the regulation;
- the assessment was issued for a Subclass 485 purpose rather than permanent skilled migration;
- the nominated occupation in the EOI did not match the suitable assessment;
- the assessing authority’s outcome was conditional or did not amount to a suitable assessment for the nominated occupation; or
- the applicant relied on a later replacement assessment that did not exist at invitation.
Can a new skills assessment fix the case?
A fresh positive assessment obtained after invitation may be useful evidence in some contexts, but it does not automatically prove that the statutory criterion was satisfied at the time of invitation. The exact wording of the applicable subclass criteria must be checked.
What should be reviewed after refusal?
- the full skills assessment letter, including issue and expiry dates;
- the occupation code and occupation title;
- the SkillSelect invitation date;
- the EOI as it stood immediately before invitation;
- any renewal or reassessment correspondence; and
- the clause relied upon in the refusal decision.
The assessing authority and Home Affairs perform different functions
A skills assessing authority decides whether the applicant meets that authority’s assessment requirements. Home Affairs then decides whether the visa criteria are met. A positive assessment therefore does not prevent refusal if the assessment does not satisfy the visa-specific timing or purpose requirements.
See the current Migration Regulations 1994 for the Subclass 189, 190, and 491 criteria. For broader strategy, visit our General Skilled Migration and ART Appeals pages.
Sources checked 21 September 2026. This article is general information only and is not legal advice. Visa criteria and review rights depend on the exact application, decision and law in force.
Related Insights:
- Australian Visa Pathways for Mining Engineers 2026: ANZSCO 233611, Engineers Australia & PR
- Australian Visa Pathways for Secondary School Teachers 2026: ANZSCO 241411, AITSL & PR
- Australian Visa Pathways for Fitters 2026: ANZSCO 323211, TRA, Employer Sponsorship & PR
- Australian Visa Pathways for Carpenters 2026: ANZSCO 331212, TRA, 189, 482 & PR
Madhab Kharel
Principal Lawyer & Director, Emigrate Lawyers
Madhab Kharel is the Principal Lawyer and Director of Emigrate Lawyers, an Australian law firm assisting clients across Australia and internationally. His migration law practice includes Partner Visas, Protection Visas, visa refusals and cancellations, Administrative Review Tribunal matters, health and character issues, Schedule 3, Section 48, sponsorship limitations and employer-sponsored migration. He regularly advises clients with complex immigration histories and matters requiring detailed legal submissions and evidence strategy.
Reviewed by Madhab Kharel, Principal Lawyer
Date reviewed: 21 September 2026
