Don Albert (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600 (Visitor) tourist stream, made by an applicant who was in Australia at the time of application. The applicant had previously held two further visas while in Australia, with the application for the current visa lodged two days after her last visa ceased. The decision under review affirmed the refusal of the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the criteria under clause 600.223 of the Migration Regulations. As the applicant did not hold a subclass 403 visa, the Tribunal was required to determine if she met the Schedule 3 criteria, specifically criteria 3001, 3003, 3004, and 3005.

The Tribunal found that the applicant satisfied criterion 3001 as her application was lodged within 28 days of her last substantive visa expiring. Criterion 3003 was also satisfied as the applicant did not fall within the specific historical circumstances outlined in that criterion. However, the Tribunal determined that the applicant failed to satisfy criterion 3004. While acknowledging factors such as memory difficulties, a recent burglary in her home country, and her stated intention to return to Sri Lanka, the Tribunal concluded that these circumstances did not meet the threshold for "factors beyond the applicant's control" or "compelling reasons" as required by criterion 3004.

Consequently, as the applicant did not satisfy clause 600.223 due to failing criterion 3004, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Visitor (Class FA) visa.