2017424 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa by an applicant from China. The applicant had departed Australia, and the Tribunal's decision under review was to affirm the refusal of the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the criterion for a protection visa that they must be a non-citizen *in* Australia, as stipulated by section 36(2) of the relevant Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 65(1) of the Act mandates that visa criteria must be satisfied for a visa to be granted. It noted that movement records indicated the applicant had left Australia in April 2021. The Tribunal communicated this information to the applicant, inviting comment, but received no response. Based on this lack of response and the movement records, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant was not in Australia, and therefore did not meet the criterion under section 36(2). Consequently, the Tribunal found it unnecessary to consider the substantive grounds of the applicant's protection claim.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.