Peirano Fargioni (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, made by an applicant who did not hold a substantive visa at the time of application. The applicant sought review of a decision affirming the refusal of his visa application. The Tribunal was required to consider whether the applicant met the additional criteria applicable to unlawful non-citizens and certain bridging visa holders, specifically Schedule 3 criterion 3001, which was engaged due to the applicant's circumstances under clause 600.223(2)(b) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied Schedule 3 criterion 3001. This criterion requires that an application for a Visitor (Class FA) Subclass 600 visa be validly made within 28 days after the 'relevant day'. In the applicant's circumstances, the relevant day was the last day he held a substantive visa. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met clause 600.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal found that the applicant held a Bridging Visa E (WE-050) when he applied for the Visitor visa on 16 December 2020, which is not a substantive visa. His last substantive visa, a Tourist (FA-600) visa, ceased on 5 May 2020. The Tribunal accepted the applicant's acknowledgement that he did not apply for the Visitor visa within 28 days of his last substantive visa ceasing. Applying Schedule 3 criterion 3001, the Tribunal determined that the applicant failed to satisfy this criterion as his application was made more than 28 days after the cessation of his last substantive visa. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet clause 600.223 and was unable to meet the criteria for the grant of the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Class FA Subclass 600 Visitor visa.