Lu (Migration)

The applicant, Lu, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the refusal of her Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600. The core of the dispute concerned the validity of her visa application, which was lodged electronically.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was whether the AAT had erred in law by finding that the applicant did not hold a substantive visa at the time she lodged her application, and consequently, that her application was invalid. This determination was crucial because a valid application for a Visitor visa requires the applicant to hold a substantive visa at the time of application, unless specific exceptions apply.

Justice Nicholls reasoned that the AAT had correctly interpreted the relevant migration regulations. Her Honour found that the applicant's previous visa had expired before the electronic lodgement of the Subclass 600 visa application. The court noted that while the applicant experienced technical difficulties during the lodgement process, these issues did not alter the fundamental fact that she did not possess a substantive visa at the critical juncture. The AAT's conclusion that the application was invalid was therefore upheld.