Many temporary visa applications, including the Subclass 482 Skills in Demand visa, require an applicant to satisfy Public Interest Criteria 4013 and 4014. For most people these criteria pass unnoticed. But for anyone with a visa cancellation or an unlawful departure in their history, they can impose a three-year exclusion that blocks a new visa grant. This guide explains what each criterion does, what triggers it, the all-important 28-day rule, and when the exclusion can be waived.
What are PIC 4013 and 4014?
PIC 4013 and 4014 are exclusion-period criteria set out in the Migration Regulations 1994. They are often described as “re-entry bans” or “exclusion periods.” They are listed as grant criteria for most temporary visas, Visitor, Student, Working Holiday, Training, and the Subclass 482 Skills in Demand visa among them. They don’t, however apply for many permanent visas, such as the Subclass 186 Employer Nomination Scheme, 189 Skilled Independent, or 309 Partner visa. If a criterion does not apply to the visa you are seeking, the exclusion does not bite for that application.
The two criteria address different events. PIC 4013 looks at whether a previous visa was cancelled and PIC 4014 looks at how you left Australia. It is common to be caught by both at once, for example, where a visa is cancelled and the person then departs unlawfully, and where that happens, each must be addressed separately.
PIC 4013: the visa cancellation risk factor
PIC 4013 is triggered where a person has had a visa cancelled under particular provisions of the Migration Act 1958. The cancellation powers that commonly engage it include section 109 (cancellation for incorrect information or bogus documents), section 116 (a range of grounds, including breaching a visa condition or being a risk to health, safety or good order), sections 128, 133A and 133C (cancellation while the holder is offshore, and the Minister’s personal cancellation powers), and section 137J (the automatic cancellation of a student visa for poor attendance or academic performance).
Where the criterion applies, a visa for which PIC 4013 is a requirement cannot be granted within three years of the cancellation, unless a waiver applies. The three-year clock runs from the date of cancellation. Importantly, if the cancellation is later set aside on review at the Administrative Review Tribunal, or revoked by the Minister, the applicant may no longer be affected, which is one reason challenging a cancellation promptly can matter well beyond the immediate decision.
PIC 4014: the unlawful departure risk factor
PIC 4014 looks at the manner of your last departure from Australia. You are affected if you left Australia as an unlawful non-citizen, that is, holding no visa at all or while holding a Bridging visa C, D or E. Where the criterion applies, a visa for which PIC 4014 is a requirement cannot be granted within three years of that departure, unless a waiver applies. Here the three-year clock runs from the date you left the country.
The criterion exists to discourage a pattern of overstaying or remaining unlawfully and then leaving and quickly seeking to return. But it does not catch everyone who leaves on a bridging visa, because of an important exception.
The 28-day rule that decides PIC 4014
PIC 4014 does not apply where your departure, or the grant of your bridging visa, fell within 28 days of your substantive visa ceasing. In practice, you are generally not affected if:
- you left Australia within 28 days of your last substantive visa ceasing; or
- the Bridging visa C, D or E you held when you left was granted within 28 days of your substantive visa ceasing; or
- that bridging visa was granted while you held another bridging visa, where the earlier one was granted within that same 28-day window.
The window is unforgiving, and small timing differences change the outcome. Two short illustrations make the point.
Example 1 – the exception applies
A worker’s substantive visa ceases, and they are granted a Bridging visa E four days later. They later leave Australia while holding a second bridging visa in the same continuous sequence. Because the first bridging visa was granted within 28 days of the substantive visa ceasing, they are not caught by PIC 4014.
Example 2 – the exception does not apply
Another person’s substantive visa ceases, but they do not apply for a bridging visa until 35 days later. They eventually depart on that bridging visa. Because the gap exceeded 28 days, the exception is broken and the three-year exclusion applies.
PIC 4013 and 4014 at a glance
| PIC 4013 – visa cancellation | PIC 4014 – unlawful departure | |
| What triggers it | A previous visa cancelled under the Migration Act (e.g. ss 109, 116, 128, 133A, 133C, 137J) | Leaving Australia as an unlawful non-citizen, or while holding a Bridging visa C, D or E |
| When the clock starts | The date the visa was cancelled | The date you departed Australia |
| Exclusion period | 3 years | 3 years |
| Key exception | If the cancellation is set aside or revoked on review | Departure, or the bridging visa grant, within 28 days of the substantive visa ceasing |
| Waiver available? | Yes – compelling/compassionate grounds | Yes – compelling/compassionate grounds |
When can the exclusion be waived?
Both criteria can be waived, but only on the same narrow, discretionary grounds. A delegate may still grant the visa within the three-year period where satisfied that there are compelling circumstances affecting the interests of Australia, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident, or an eligible New Zealand citizen.
Policy points to examples such as serious effects on Australia’s trade or international relations, or the loss of a significant skill or contribution to Australia, and to serious effects on an Australian-connected family member. Generic factors that you would work, pay tax, study, or spend money in Australia are not enough on their own. And if you are affected by both PIC 4013 and PIC 4014, each requires its own waiver case; satisfying one does not satisfy the other.
Because the grounds are tied to the interests of Australia or an Australian-connected person rather than hardship to the applicant alone, a waiver case has to be built deliberately and evidenced well.
What to do if you may be affected
- Check whether the criterion even applies. Not every visa carries PIC 4013 and 4014, and many people assume they are caught when they are not. A careful review of your visa history can settle it.
- Pin down the dates. For PIC 4013, the date of cancellation; for PIC 4014, the date of departure and the exact timing of any bridging visa grant against the 28-day window.
- Consider challenging the underlying cancellation. If a cancellation is set aside or revoked, the PIC 4013 risk factor may fall away.
- Weigh waiting against seeking a waiver. Sometimes the three-year period is close to expiring and patience is the cheaper path; sometimes a waiver is the only realistic option.
- Build the waiver case around Australia or an Australian. Hardship to you alone rarely succeeds; evidence of compelling or compassionate effects on Australia or an Australian-connected person is what the rule contemplates.
- Get advice before lodging. Lodging into an exclusion period without a waiver case can waste the application fee and the wait.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between PIC 4013 and PIC 4014?
PIC 4013 is about a visa cancellation, with the three-year clock running from the date of cancellation. PIC 4014 is about how you left Australia, unlawfully, or on a Bridging visa C, D or E, with the clock running from the date of departure. They address different events, and you can be affected by both at the same time.
Do these exclusions apply to permanent visas?
Generally, no. PIC 4013 and 4014 are criteria for most temporary visas but are not listed for many permanent pathways, such as the Subclass 186, 189, or 309. That means a person caught by a temporary-visa exclusion may still have a permanent option open – a key reason to map the right pathway before applying.
Can I be affected by both at the same time?
Yes. A common scenario is a visa cancelled under the Migration Act, followed by an unlawful departure more than 28 days later. Each criterion then applies, and each needs its own response, including a separate waiver case if you are seeking a grant within three years.
How do I prove compelling or compassionate circumstances?
The focus is on serious effects on the interests of Australia, or on an Australian citizen, permanent resident, or eligible New Zealand citizen, for example, a significant skill Australia needs, or genuine hardship to an Australian family member. Strong, specific, well-documented evidence is essential; broad assertions about working or paying tax are not enough.
How can SALIA Lawyers & Associates assist?
If you have had a visa cancelled, departed Australia unlawfully or on a bridging visa, or received a notice that raises PIC 4013 or 4014, the safest next step is to have your history and options reviewed before you lodge anything. At SALIA Lawyers & Associates, we advise applicants and employers on exclusion periods, from confirming whether a criterion even applies, to challenging a cancellation, to preparing a waiver case. Get in touch at www.salia.com.au or hello@salia.com.au to talk through your circumstances.
Disclaimer: This information is a general guide only and should not be relied upon as legal or migration advice. Migration laws and policy change frequently, and outcomes depend on individual circumstances. Always check the official sources before lodging any application. We recommend consulting an Australian legal practitioner or registered migration agent for advice tailored to your situation.
