Pervez and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Pervez for an extension of time to lodge an application for Australian citizenship, which was refused by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The dispute centred on whether Ms Pervez met the general residence requirements of the *Australian Citizenship Act 1948* (Cth) (the Act) at the time she lodged her citizenship application. The decision was made by Dr L Bygrave, Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant Ms Pervez an extension of time to lodge her citizenship application. This required the Tribunal to consider the merits of the substantive application, specifically whether Ms Pervez satisfied the general residence requirements as stipulated in section 22 of the Act. These requirements include being present in Australia for a period of four years immediately before the application, and for 12 months of that period as a permanent resident, with specific provisions for allowable overseas absences.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on Ms Pervez's significant periods of absence from Australia. The Minister's records indicated that in the four years prior to her citizenship application, Ms Pervez was absent for 1454 days and present for only seven days, exceeding the 12-month allowable absence under section 22(1)(a) of the Act. Furthermore, in the 12 months preceding her application, she was absent for 358 days and present for seven days, exceeding the 90-day allowable absence as a permanent resident under section 22(1)(c). Although Ms Pervez argued for the Minister to exercise discretion under section 22(9) of the Act, the Tribunal was not satisfied that granting an extension of time was reasonable, taking into account both the explanation for the delay and the lack of merit in the substantive application due to her failure to meet the residence requirements.

Consequently, the Tribunal refused Ms Pervez's application for an extension of time.