050.212
The applicant meets the requirements of subclause (2), (3), (3A), (4), (4AAA), (4AA), (4AB), (5), (5A), (5B), (6), (6AA), (6A), (7), (8) or (9).
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if the Minister is satisfied that the applicant is making, or is the subject of, acceptable arrangements to depart Australia.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant has made, in Australia, a valid application for a substantive visa of a kind that can be granted if the applicant is in Australia and that application has not been finally determined; or
the Minister is satisfied that the applicant will apply, in Australia, within a period allowed by the Minister for the purpose, for a substantive visa of a kind that can be granted if the applicant is in Australia.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant has made, in Australia, a valid application for a substantive visa of a kind that can be granted if the applicant is in Australia; and
either:
the applicant has applied for judicial review of a decision to refuse to grant the visa and the judicial proceedings (including any proceedings on appeal) have not been completed; or
the Minister has applied for judicial review of a decision in relation to a refusal to grant the applicant’s substantive visa, and the judicial review proceedings (including any proceedings on appeal) have not been completed.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant has applied for judicial review of a decision in relation to a substantive visa, other than a decision to refuse to grant a visa; or
the Minister has applied for judicial review of a decision in relation to the applicant’s substantive visa application, other than a decision relating to a refusal to grant the substantive visa; or
the applicant has applied for merits review of a decision to cancel a visa; or
the applicant has applied under section 137K of the Act for revocation of the cancellation of a visa; or
the applicant has applied for merits review of a decision under section 137L of the Act not to revoke the cancellation of a visa; or
the Minister is satisfied that the applicant will make an application of a kind referred to in paragraph (b), (ba) or (bb); or
the applicant has applied for judicial review of the validity of a law that affects:
the applicant’s eligibility to apply for a substantive visa; or
the applicant’s entitlement to be granted or to continue to hold a substantive visa.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if the applicant has applied for:
a declaration from a court that the Act does not apply to the applicant; or
judicial review or merits review of a decision made in relation to the applicant under the Australian Citizenship Act 2007;
and the proceedings for the declaration or review have not been completed.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant is a member of the family unit of a person whose substantive visa application is the subject of the judicial review proceedings mentioned in:
paragraph (3A)(b); or
paragraph (4)(a); or
paragraph (4)(aa); or
paragraph (4)(d); and
the person whose substantive visa application is the subject of the judicial review proceedings is not a party to a representative proceeding; and
the applicant made a substantive visa application that was combined with the substantive visa application mentioned in:
paragraph (3A)(a); or
subclause (4).
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if the applicant is:
a member of the immediate family of a person who meets the requirements of subclause (4AAA); or
a brother or sister who has not turned 18, of a person who:
meets the requirements of subclause (4AAA); and
has not turned 18.
Regulation 1.12AA defines member of the immediate family.
For the purposes of subclauses (3A), (4) and (4AAA), the applicant is taken to have applied for judicial review if the applicant:
is described or identified, in an application or document filed for the purposes of section 33H of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, as a group member to whom a representative proceeding relates; or
is a person on whose behalf or for whose benefit a person sues under rule 21.09.1 of the High Court Rules 2004.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
he or she held a visa that was cancelled under subsection 140(1) or (3) of the Act (which deals with cancellation because of the cancellation of a visa held by another person); and
either:
the other person whose visa was cancelled has applied for review of the decision to cancel his or her visa; or
the Minister is satisfied that that other person will make an application of that kind.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant held a visa that was cancelled under subsection 140(1), (2) or (3) of the Act because another person’s visa was cancelled under section 137J of the Act; and
one of the following applies in relation to the person whose visa was cancelled under section 137J of the Act:
he or she has applied under section 137K of the Act for revocation of the cancellation of the visa;
he or she has applied for merits review of a decision under section 137L of the Act not to revoke the cancellation of the visa;
the Minister is satisfied that he or she will make an application of a kind mentioned in subparagraph (i) or (ii).
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if the applicant:
is a person to whom section 48A of the Act applies; and
has made a request to the Minister to determine under section 48B of the Act that section 48A of the Act does not apply to prevent an application for a protection visa by the applicant; and
has not previously sought, or been the subject of a request by another person for:
a determination under section 48B of the Act; or
the exercise of the Minister’s power under section 351, or repealed section 417, of the Act.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant is the subject of:
a decision in relation to an application made in Australia for a visa; or
a decision to cancel a visa; and
in relation to the decision mentioned in paragraph (a), the applicant:
is the subject of a decision for which the Minister has the power to substitute a more favourable decision under section 351 of the Act; and
has made a request to the Minister to substitute a more favourable decision under section 351, or repealed section 417, of the Act; and
the applicant has not previously sought, or been the subject of a request by another person for:
the exercise of the Minister’s power under section 351, or repealed section 417, of the Act; or
a determination under section 48B of the Act.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if the Minister has decided, under section 351 or repealed section 417 of the Act, to substitute a more favourable decision for the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or the ART but the applicant cannot, for the time being, be granted a substantive visa because of a determination under section 85 of the Act.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant holds a Bridging E (Class WE) visa granted on the basis of the applicant meeting the requirements of subclause (6AA); and
the Minister has decided, under section 351 or repealed section 417 of the Act, to substitute a more favourable decision for the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or the ART but the applicant cannot, for the time being, be granted a substantive visa because of a determination under section 85 of the Act; and
the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has a compelling need to work.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant is in criminal detention; and
no criminal justice stay certificate or criminal justice stay warrant about the applicant is in force.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant holds a Bridging E (Class WE) visa that:
was granted as a result of a valid application, made in Australia, for a substantive visa of a kind that could be granted if the applicant was in Australia; and
is subject to condition 8101; and
the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has a compelling need to work; and
in the case of an applicant who was an applicant for a protection visa—either:
the reasons for the delay in making the application for a protection visa are acceptable to the Minister; or
the applicant is in a class of persons specified by the Minister by instrument in writing for this subparagraph.
An applicant meets the requirements of this subclause if:
the applicant has made a valid application for a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa; and
that application was refused; and
either:
the applicant, or the Minister, has applied, within statutory time limits, for judicial review of a decision in relation to the applicant’s substantive visa application; or
the applicant:
is a member of the family unit of a person whose substantive visa application is the subject of the judicial review proceedings mentioned in subparagraph (i); and
made a substantive visa application that was combined with the substantive visa application mentioned in subparagraph (i);
and the applicant or family unit member does not satisfy the criterion in paragraph 010.211(6)(c) for the grant of a Bridging A (Class WA) visa; and
the judicial review proceedings (including proceedings on appeal, if any) are not completed.
050.22—Criteria to be satisfied at time of decision
This Act’s bill:Explanatory statement
The statute text is free to read above. View subscription options to unlock the case-law research tools for each provision.