NOLAN (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, subclass 485, made by the applicant. The Tribunal, constituted by Alison Mercer, was required to determine whether the applicant had met the requirements of clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The central legal issue was whether the applicant's visa application had been accompanied by evidence that she, and any other applicant aged 16 or over, had applied for an Australian Federal Police (AFP) check within the 12 months immediately preceding the date of the visa application. The applicant had lodged her application online on 1 March 2017, answering "no" to the question of whether she had applied for an AFP check in the preceding 12 months and providing no documentary evidence to that effect. She subsequently applied for and obtained an AFP check on 23 and 25 April 2017, respectively, which she later provided to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal reasoned that the plain wording of clause 485.213 mandated that the visa application, at the time of lodgement, must have been accompanied by evidence of an AFP check application within the preceding 12 months. While accepting the applicant's misunderstanding of this requirement was inadvertent, the Tribunal found that she had not applied for an AFP check in the relevant period. Relying on the principles established in *Panchal v Minister for Immigration* [2012] FMCA 562 and *Anand v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship* [2013] FCA 1050, the Tribunal concluded that evidence submitted five months after the application was lodged was too late to be considered as "accompanied by" the application.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a subclass 485 visa. The decision under review, which was not to grant the visa, was therefore affirmed.