Siavoshi (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by an applicant seeking a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate), and a secondary applicant who applied as a member of the applicant's family unit. The primary dispute revolved around the applicant's failure to provide evidence of having applied for an Australian Federal Police (AFP) check at the time of lodging the visa application, as required by the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa, specifically clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations, which mandates that evidence of having applied for an AFP check must accompany the visa application. The applicant contended that the visa conditions were unclear and that they understood the AFP check could be provided after lodgement.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal noted that while an applicant is not required to submit the AFP check itself with the application, evidence of having applied for one is a mandatory requirement to meet clause 485.213. The applicant admitted to not providing this evidence with the initial application and only submitted receipts and acknowledgements from the AFP dated after the visa refusal. The Tribunal found no evidence that the applicant had applied for the AFP check within the 12 months preceding the visa application lodgement. Consequently, the applicant failed to satisfy clause 485.213, meaning they did not meet the criteria for the Subclass 485 visa.

As the primary applicant did not satisfy the visa requirements, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa to the applicant. Consequently, the Tribunal also affirmed the decision to refuse the visa application of the secondary applicant, who had applied as a member of the family unit.