Mois Cruz (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600 (Visitor) in the tourist stream, made by the applicant, Mois Cruz. The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant her the visa. The central dispute concerned whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 600.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied clause 600.223, which governs eligibility for a Visitor visa when an applicant is in Australia. Specifically, the Tribunal had to ascertain if the applicant met the Schedule 3 criteria, including criterion 3001, given she did not hold a substantive visa at the time of her application. Clause 600.223(2)(b) mandates satisfaction of Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003, 3004, and 3005 for applicants in this situation.

The Tribunal reasoned that criterion 3001 requires an application to be lodged within 28 days of the "relevant day," which is the last day the applicant held a substantive visa. The applicant's last substantive visa expired on 26 February 2020, and her current application was lodged on 19 January 2021, well outside the 28-day timeframe. While the applicant claimed she relied on advice from a previous agent who indicated she could apply for a partner visa after receiving the visitor visa, and that she could seek review to gain more time, the Tribunal found this did not overcome the mandatory nature of criterion 3001. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy criterion 3001, and therefore did not meet the requirements of clause 600.223(2)(b).

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Visitor (Class FA) visa.