Chanked (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Residence) (Class BT) visa, Subclass 802, made by an applicant who was over 24 years of age. The applicant had a migration history involving multiple entries to Australia on a Visitor visa, with a period of unlawful residence following the cessation of her last Visitor visa before applying for the Subclass 802 visa. The applicant also sought a referral to the Minister for intervention. The decision reviewed was affirmed by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the Subclass 802 visa, specifically clause 802.214, at the time of her application on 17 August 2017, and whether she continued to meet the relevant criteria at the time of the decision, as required by clause 802.221(2)(b). The Tribunal also considered the criteria for applicants over 18, which include requirements relating to relationships, work, and study.

The Tribunal found that the applicant met the relationship criterion under clause 802.214(1)(a) at both the time of application and the time of decision, based on her credible oral evidence that she was single and not engaged. However, the Tribunal determined that the applicant did not meet the time of decision requirement under clause 802.221(2)(b) because she was engaged in full-time work and not full-time studies. This finding meant that the criteria for the grant of the visa were not met. Despite the applicant's circumstances, including her long residence in Australia, her family responsibilities, and her desire to remain, the Tribunal concluded that it did not warrant a referral to the Minister for intervention under section 351 of the Act.