Suraj (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate). The applicant had indicated on his visa application form that he had not applied for an Australian Federal Police (AFP) check within the 12 months immediately preceding the application date. Subsequently, the applicant provided evidence of an AFP check application made after the visa application was lodged. The delegate found, and the Tribunal affirmed, that the applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 485.213, which mandates that a visa application must be accompanied by evidence that the applicant, and any accompanying persons aged 16 or over, had applied for an AFP check within the 12 months immediately before the date of the visa application. The applicant contended that he had lodged the application without professional assistance and had answered "no" to the AFP check question to avoid providing false information, only realising the requirement for a pre-application AFP check after lodging. He then promptly applied for the check.

The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's explanation and the fact that he provided evidence of an AFP check application shortly after lodging his visa application. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence clearly indicated the AFP check was applied for after the visa application was made, and not within the requisite 12-month period prior to the application. The Tribunal reiterated that clause 485.213 requires the application to have been *accompanied* by evidence of an AFP check applied for in the specified period. As it was not disputed that the applicant had not applied for the AFP check in the 12 months before lodging his application, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant failed to satisfy this criterion.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Subclass 485 visa, as he did not meet the necessary criteria for its grant.