Tashiro (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal regarding a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, subclass 485. The applicant sought review of the delegate's decision to refuse her visa application. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had satisfied a specific visa criterion requiring evidence of an Australian Federal Police (AFP) check.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether the applicant had complied with Clause 485.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that a subclass 485 visa application must be accompanied by evidence that the applicant, and any accompanying person aged 16 or over, had applied for an AFP check within the 12 months immediately preceding the date of the visa application. The Tribunal was required to assess whether the evidence provided by the applicant met this temporal requirement.

The Tribunal found that the applicant lodged her visa application on 28 March 2019 and answered negatively to having applied for an AFP check in the preceding 12 months, nor did she provide any documentary evidence to that effect at the time of application. While the applicant subsequently provided an AFP national police history check dated 20 May 2019 and evidence of a Tokyo police check dated 18 June 2020, the Tribunal determined that these did not satisfy the timeframe stipulated in Clause 485.213. The Tribunal reasoned that the plain wording of the regulation required the application for the AFP check to have occurred within the 12 months *before* the visa application was lodged. The applicant acknowledged not meeting this requirement and stated she was unaware of it. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the criteria for the grant of the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, subclass 485, as she failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements of Clause 485.213.