Broide and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application by Professor David Broide for Australian citizenship, which had been refused by the respondent's delegate on the grounds that Professor Broide did not satisfy the residence criteria under section 22B(1)(c) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth). The decision was reviewed by Senior Member N A Manetta of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation of the phrase "immediately before the day the person made the application" within section 22B(1)(c), and specifically, when Professor Broide's application was considered to have been "made".

The legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine the precise date on which Professor Broide's citizenship application was "made" for the purposes of satisfying the 480-day residence requirement. The parties agreed that if the application was made on April 7, 2022, the date Professor Broide posted his application and paid the fee from the United States, he would satisfy the criterion. Conversely, they agreed that if the application was only considered "made" on April 28, 2022, the date the application was received by the respondent in Australia, he would fall short by three days.

The Tribunal reasoned that the interpretation of when an application is "made" could lead to arbitrary and illogical outcomes depending on the method of lodgement. Following the decision in *Somai*, which considered a similar issue, the Tribunal found that the application was "made" on April 7, 2022, the date it was lodged with the postal service and the fee was paid. The Tribunal noted that the respondent had not cited *Somai* in its submissions, despite it being relevant. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted a decision that Professor Broide satisfied section 22B(1)(c), directing the respondent to resume consideration of his application.