Keter (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600 (Visitor) in the tourist stream, made by Mr Keter. Mr Keter applied for the visa after his last substantive visa had expired. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Keter met the criteria under clause 600.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically concerning Schedule 3 requirements for applicants who do not hold a substantive visa at the time of application.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Keter satisfied the Schedule 3 criteria, particularly criterion 3004. This criterion requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant is not the holder of a substantive visa due to factors beyond their control, that there are compelling reasons for granting the visa, and that the applicant has substantially complied with the conditions of their previous visas. The Tribunal also considered criterion 3001, which requires the application to be lodged within 28 days of the relevant day, and criterion 3003, which was found not to apply in this case.

The Tribunal found that Mr Keter satisfied criterion 3001 as his application was lodged within 28 days of his last substantive visa expiring. However, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr Keter's failure to hold a substantive visa was due to factors beyond his control, as required by criterion 3004(c). The reasons provided for this conclusion, though not detailed in the provided text, led the Tribunal to find that Mr Keter did not meet this essential element of Schedule 3.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Mr Keter the Visitor (Class FA) visa, as he failed to satisfy the requirements of clause 600.223 due to not meeting the "factors beyond his control" element of Schedule 3 criterion 3004.