Counting the 35-Day BVA Cease Date After Refusal: Practitioner Checklist (2026)

A Bridging visa A (BVA) (Subclass 010) granted on or after 19 November 2016 ceases 35 calendar days after the refusal of the associated substantive visa application — and the date the count runs from is the date of the decision, not the day the letter reached the applicant. As of the August 2026 version of the Department of Home Affairs' Bridging visa A (Subclass 010) page, that 35-day period applies to the refusal decision or an Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) decision on the associated substantive application, and the exact date a holder may remain until is the one shown in VEVO once the outcome has been notified. This checklist explains how that date is built and is not advice on any individual matter; where a person's lawful status turns on a particular day, the recorded VEVO date and the current official text are what govern.

What date actually starts the 35 days?

The Regulations tie the period to the decision itself. Subclass 010 sets the cease point at "35 days after the Minister makes the decision," which means the operative event is the making of the refusal, not its receipt, its translation, or its collection from a post office box.

In practice the two dates usually fall close together, which is why the error survives unnoticed for so long. They diverge when notification is posted to a stale address, when an email lands in a spam folder, or when the client simply does not open the correspondence for a week. A count built from the date of receipt will then overstate the time remaining, and the client discovers the discrepancy only when VEVO shows an earlier date than the file note predicts.

Treat the decision date as the anchor and the VEVO entry as the confirmation. Never present the arrival date as the start date.

Which generation of BVA is on the file?

The threshold is 19 November 2016, and it turns on when the BVA was granted, not when the substantive application was lodged and not when the refusal was made. A client who has held the same BVA for years may be on the older rule; a client whose BVA was re-granted more recently may be on the newer one even though the underlying application is old.

Establish the grant date from the grant letter or the visa record before applying any arithmetic. Getting this wrong swaps 35 days for 28, which is a full week of difference on a date that ends lawful status.

Which outcomes give 35 days, and which give 28?

Outcome	BVA granted on or after 19 November 2016	BVA granted before 19 November 2016
Substantive visa application refused	35 calendar days after the refusal decision	28 days after notification of the refusal
AAT decision on the associated substantive application	35 calendar days after the AAT decision	28 days after the tribunal notifies you that it upheld the refusal
Substantive visa application (or, for post-2016 grants, an AAT review application) determined to be invalid	35 calendar days after the determination	28 days after notification that the substantive visa application is not valid
Withdrawal of the substantive application or the AAT review application	35 calendar days	28 days
Judicial review body upholds the refusal	28 calendar days	28 days
Withdrawal of a related judicial review application	28 calendar days	28 days
Merits review tribunal says it has no jurisdiction	Not enumerated in the 35-day list; the Department lists it among the outcomes that determine cessation — read the recorded date in VEVO	28 days after the tribunal notifies you

One structural difference is worth carrying into every file. The pre-2016 list is drafted by reference to notification — "we notify you," "the tribunal notifies you." The post-2016 list is drafted by reference to the event — the decision, the determination, the withdrawal. That asymmetry is why the same refusal can produce different counting exercises on two files sitting side by side.

Was the notification valid?

Notification of a visa decision is governed by section 66 of the Migration Act and regulation 2.16, and the Department's guidance for Subclass 010 records two points that matter here. Where a BVA is granted on the same day as the substantive visa, no separate notification of the BVA is required; in any other case, the BVA must be notified separately.

The second point is the one that changes advice. Where notification is defective, the BVA may not cease when the file assumes it does, and re-notification may be required. That is not a windfall: it means the cease date is unsettled and may move, so a client should not be told they have extra time on the strength of a gap in the paper trail. Confirm that notification was given, note the method and date, and reconcile it against the recorded date.

What ends the BVA before the 35 days have run?

Four events cut the visa short regardless of how much of the period remains:

the holder leaves Australia while the BVA is in effect — it ceases on departure and cannot be used to return
the substantive visa applied for is granted
another bridging visa, such as a BVB, is granted in relation to the same substantive application
the Department cancels either the BVA or the substantive visa the holder held when the BVA was granted

Departure is the most common. Suppose an applicant departs on day four of the 35: the period is irrelevant, the BVA ceased at the border, and returning on it is not an option. A BVB must have been granted before leaving if travel and return were intended.

Judicial review is the other trap. The Department's page states that where a merits review tribunal upholds a refusal and the person applies for judicial review, a bridging visa application is needed to maintain lawful status during those proceedings, and that a judicial review–related bridging visa can be applied for only by webform. The 35 days following an AAT decision are not an extension for the duration of the litigation.

How do you reconcile the count against VEVO?

Work the file in this order and record each step:

Establish the grant date of the BVA and classify it as before, or on or after, 19 November 2016.
Identify the exact outcome event and its date — refusal decision, AAT decision, invalidity determination, withdrawal, or no-jurisdiction notice. Take the date from the decision record, not from the client's recollection.
Apply the correct period — 35 or 28 calendar days. Calendar days count every day, so weekends and public holidays are included and nothing pauses.
Test for immediate cessation before doing any arithmetic: departure, grant of the substantive visa, grant of another bridging visa, or cancellation.
Check the notification — that it was given, and given validly. A defect leaves the date open to recomputation rather than settled in the client's favour.
Read VEVO and take the recorded cease date as the operative one. Where the manual count and VEVO disagree, the discrepancy is the item to resolve; do not split the difference or assume the longer date.
Check each family member separately. Members of the family unit are assessed individually and may hold different bridging visas with different dates, even where the substantive application was lodged jointly.
Keep the evidence — the decision and notification, the VEVO record with the date it was retrieved, and, once the client departs, the movement record confirming the departure date.

Where the count most often goes wrong

Counting from receipt of the letter rather than from the decision.
Applying the 35-day rule to a BVA granted before 19 November 2016.
Treating a judicial review outcome as if it carried 35 days; it carries 28.
Assuming a no-jurisdiction outcome sits inside the 35-day enumeration. It appears in the Department's general list of outcomes and in the pre-2016 28-day list, but not among the post-2016 35-day triggers — read the recorded date.
Counting business days instead of calendar days.
Overlooking departure, which ends the visa on the spot.
Reading a defective notification as extra time rather than as an unsettled date.

One further point should be flagged rather than relied upon: the Migration Regulations 1994 provide that where the substantive visa was refused because the applicant did not meet public interest criteria 4003 or 4003A, the 35-day period may not apply at all. That is not set out on the Department's public BVA page, so confirm it against the current Migration Regulations 1994 text and current official guidance before acting on it. Rules in this area are amended, and the position stated here reflects the official page as published in August 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 35 days counted from the day I received the refusal letter?

No. The Regulations set the cease point at 35 days after the Minister makes the decision, so the decision date is the anchor. Where the letter reaches you later, the period has already been running, which is why VEVO may show an earlier date than a count based on receipt.

My BVA was granted in 2015 — do I get 35 days or 28?

A BVA granted before 19 November 2016 ceases 28 days after the relevant notification, not 35 days after the decision. The threshold turns on the grant date of the BVA, so an old grant keeps the old rule even if the refusal happens years later.

Does the 35-day period pause if I apply for judicial review?

No. A judicial review–related outcome carries a 28-day period, and the Department's page states that a separate bridging visa application is needed to remain lawful during judicial review proceedings. The 35 days following an AAT decision are a window in which to act, not an extension that runs with the case.

What if the AAT says it has no jurisdiction?

The Department lists a no-jurisdiction notification among the outcomes that determine when a BVA ceases, and for pre-2016 grants it is a 28-day trigger. It does not appear in the post-2016 35-day enumeration, so read the recorded date in VEVO rather than assuming either figure applies.

Where do I find the exact date I must leave?

VEVO. The Department's page directs holders to VEVO after an outcome has been notified to see exactly how long they can stay, and that recorded date is the operative one where a manual count differs from it.

Do my partner and children have the same cease date?

Not necessarily. Each member of the family unit is assessed individually and may be granted a different bridging visa, so each person's record needs to be checked separately even where the substantive application was lodged together.

Does leaving Australia early change anything?

Yes, and not in the client's favour. A BVA that is in effect ceases on departure and cannot be used to return, so the remaining days simply disappear. A BVB must have been granted before travel if return was intended.