Stefanakou (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 820, before the Tribunal. The applicant had entered Australia on a Subclass 601 visa which expired on 10 July 2016. Subsequent applications for a Subclass 600 visa and a Subclass 602 medical treatment visa were made and withdrawn or refused, leaving the applicant holding a bridging visa. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the Schedule 3 criteria, or if there were compelling reasons for these criteria not to be applied.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the Schedule 3 criteria, specifically criterion 3001, which mandates that an application for a visa must be lodged within 28 days of the "relevant day." The definition of the "relevant day" under Schedule 3 is crucial, particularly in circumstances where the applicant does not hold a substantive visa at the time of application. The Tribunal also had to consider whether, if the Schedule 3 criteria were not met, there were compelling reasons to waive their application.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's last substantive visa expired on 10 July 2016, which constituted the "relevant day" for the purposes of criterion 3001. As the visa application was not lodged within 28 days of this date, the applicant did not satisfy criterion 3001. However, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had provided evidence of a Subclass 602 medical treatment visa application that was refused, and that the applicant remained on a bridging visa. The Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for a Subclass 820 visa, with a direction that the applicant meets criterion cl.820.211(2)(d)(ii) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.