Ramachandran (Migration)

This matter concerned an application to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse Ms Uma Ramachandran a Visitor (Class FA) Subclass 600 visa, tourist stream. Ms Ramachandran applied for the visa on 3 September 2020 while she was in Australia. The delegate refused the visa on the basis that Ms Ramachandran did not satisfy clause 600.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, as she was in Australia at the time of application, did not hold a substantive visa, and failed to satisfy the Schedule 3 criteria, specifically criterion 3001.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Ramachandran satisfied Schedule 3 criterion 3001. This criterion requires that an application for a visa be lodged within 28 days of the "relevant day," which is defined as the last day the applicant held a substantive visa or criminal justice visa. The Tribunal was required to determine the date on which Ms Ramachandran's last substantive visa ceased to be in effect and whether her visa application was lodged within the prescribed 28-day period.

The Tribunal found that Ms Ramachandran's last substantive visa was a Visitor (Class FA) Subclass 600 visa, which was valid until 5 August 2020. This date was supported by evidence provided by the applicant and noted in the delegate's decision record. Consequently, the last day Ms Ramachandran held a substantive visa was 5 August 2020. The visa application was lodged on 3 September 2020. Therefore, the application was lodged 29 days after the cessation of her last substantive visa, meaning she did not satisfy the 28-day requirement of Schedule 3 criterion 3001. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa.