Zeng (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, made by Ms. Zeng. The dispute arose because Ms. Zeng applied for the visa after her last substantive visa had ceased. The Tribunal was required to determine whether Ms. Zeng met the criteria for the grant of the visa, specifically focusing on Schedule 3 criteria, including criterion 3004.

The central legal issue was whether Ms. Zeng satisfied criterion 3004 of Schedule 3, which requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant is not holding a substantive visa due to factors beyond their control, that there are compelling reasons for granting the visa, and that the applicant has substantially complied with visa conditions. The Tribunal also considered whether Ms. Zeng would have been entitled to the visa had she applied when she last held a substantive visa.

The Tribunal reasoned that while Ms. Zeng argued that factors beyond her control, such as her age, lack of English, reliance on her son who misread a notice, and COVID-19 restrictions, prevented her from maintaining lawful status, these factors did not satisfy the stringent requirements of criterion 3004. The Tribunal emphasised the applicant's responsibility to maintain lawful status in Australia. It found that Ms. Zeng had not substantially complied with the conditions of her previous visa and that she had not demonstrated that she would have been entitled to the visa had she applied earlier.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Ms. Zeng a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, as she failed to satisfy the applicable criteria.