1800215 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa made by an applicant from China. The applicant had previously left Australia, and the Tribunal was reviewing a decision not to grant the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criterion for a protection visa that they must be a non-citizen *in* Australia. This criterion is stipulated by section 36(2) of the relevant Act, which requires the decision-maker to be satisfied that the prescribed criteria for the visa have been met under section 65(1).

The Tribunal reasoned that a protection visa can only be granted if the applicant is physically present in Australia. Movement records indicated that the applicant had departed Australia in April 2020. The Tribunal notified the applicant of this information and invited comment, but no response was received. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant was not in Australia and therefore did not meet the essential criterion under section 36(2).

As the applicant failed to satisfy the fundamental requirement of being in Australia, the Tribunal determined it was unnecessary to consider the substantive grounds of the applicant's protection claim. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa.