Proving you hold a BVA or BVB at both application and decision time: Subclass 020 eligibility evidence (2026)

You must already hold a Bridging visa A (BVA) or a Bridging visa B (BVB) when you apply for a Bridging visa B (Subclass 020), and you must still hold one when the decision on that application is made. The Australian Department of Home Affairs states that you must already hold a BVA or BVB, and the Migration Regulations 1994 apply a matching requirement when the decision on that application is made. This article describes how those criteria are framed in general terms; it is not advice on an individual case, and because the criteria are legal tests with real consequences, the current official wording is what governs any application.

What has to be true about your bridging visa, and when?

The BVB is built on top of a bridging visa you already have. It is the visa that lets you leave and return to Australia while a substantive visa application is being processed, and that function only makes sense if there is a bridging visa underneath it the whole way through.

Requirement	When you apply	When the decision is made
Hold a BVA or a BVB	Required	Required
Be in Australia	Required	Required if you meet all eligibility requirements, at the time of grant
Have made a valid application for a substantive visa that can be granted in Australia	Required	Must still be pending, or be under judicial review that has not finished

The first row is the one applicants most often treat as a single check. The regulations and the Department's procedural guidance treat it as two: the requirement to hold a BVA or BVB sits at the point of application, and a matching requirement sits at the point of decision. If the bridging visa underneath stops at any stage and nothing replaces it, the chain is broken and the BVB application has nothing to attach to.

Do you also need to have held a substantive visa?

Yes. Separately from holding a bridging visa, the Department's page requires that you have held a substantive visa. That is a past-state requirement about your visa history, not about what you hold today, and it is distinct from the BVA/BVB requirement that runs across both time points.

What must be true about the substantive visa application?

You must have made a valid application for a substantive visa, and one of two things must apply:

that application has not been finally determined, or
that application was refused, you applied for judicial review within the prescribed timeframe, and the judicial review proceedings have not been completed.

The Department's page also requires that the substantive visa application was made in Australia, and that it is for a visa that can be granted while you are in Australia. Once granted, a BVB carries its own obligations: you must stay lawfully in Australia until the substantive visa application is finally determined, or, if the matter continues on judicial review, until those proceedings are completed, and you must leave and return within the defined travel period.

What if the visa was refused and you are seeking review?

Timing becomes part of the evidence. The Department's page states that the timeframe for applying for judicial review is 35 days from the date of the Tribunal's decision, and that not applying within the statutory timeframes may affect your eligibility to apply for a further bridging visa. For merits review, the same page requires the review application to be made within the prescribed timeframe, and notes that if you applied within it, you may not need to apply for a further bridging visa at all.

The Migration Regulations 1994 provide a related but different stop date: a BVB granted on judicial review grounds ceases 28 days after court proceedings end, compared with the 35-day figure that follows a Tribunal decision.

Where do you have to be?

You must be in Australia when you apply, and you must be in Australia at the time of grant if you meet all the eligibility requirements. The Migration Regulations 1994 and the Department's PAM3 procedural guidance add further validity conditions: the correct form, payment of the visa application charge, not being in immigration clearance, and not being in immigration or criminal detention.

What actually shows you hold a BVA or BVB?

The practical question is not whether you once held one, but whether you can show the bridging visa is in effect at the moment it matters. Evidence that does that work points in the same direction at both time points:

the grant notification for the BVA or BVB, showing the visa class and the grant date;
the Department's record of your current visa, showing the bridging visa is still in effect rather than ceased or superseded;
anything showing the substantive visa application behind it is still on foot, since the bridging visa and that application rise and fall together.

One nuance in the Department's PAM3 procedural guidance is worth knowing: a BVB can be "held" but not "in effect" at a given moment, for example while you hold a substantive visa, and it can in some circumstances be reactivated. Whether a particular BVB counts as held at the relevant time is therefore a question about its status, not only its existence.

What else can end the chain?

Holding the bridging visa is necessary, not sufficient. The Department's page also requires substantial reasons for wanting to travel, with supporting documents explaining why you need to depart and return while the substantive visa is being considered or while judicial review is pending, and it requires you to meet the character requirement. There is no age limit.

Two further points come from the Migration Regulations 1994 and the Department's PAM3 procedural guidance. First, Subclass 020 has no separate secondary criteria: every applicant must satisfy the primary criteria, so a partner or child does not ride along on someone else's application. Second, the criteria do not include financial capacity, employer sponsorship or a "compelling need to work" test; PAM3 notes that a person who needs work rights is directed toward a BVA instead, and that work is permitted only if your BVB allows it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I have to hold the BVA or BVB continuously from application to decision?

The requirement is stated at two points — when you apply and when the decision is made — rather than as a moment-by-moment test. In practice, any gap in which you hold no BVA or BVB leaves the application unsupported, so the safe assumption is that the bridging visa must be in place throughout.

Can I still apply if my BVA has already ceased?

On the framing above, no. If there is no BVA or BVB in effect at the time of application or at the time of decision, the core requirement is not met, and the outcome described in the procedural guidance is refusal or withdrawal of the application.

Does my partner or child get a BVB automatically with mine?

No. The Migration Regulations 1994 record no secondary criteria for Subclass 020, with the note that all applicants must satisfy the primary criteria, so each family member must qualify in their own right.

What happens if my substantive visa is decided while my BVB application is pending?

The BVB depends on the substantive visa application not being finally determined, or on judicial review proceedings being unfinished. If the application is finally determined before the BVB is decided, the basis for the BVB disappears with it.

Does a BVB give me work rights?

Only if your BVB permits it. The procedural guidance notes there is no "compelling need to work" pathway in this subclass, and that a BVA is the visa usually considered where work rights are the goal.

Is the travel period the same as the visa period?

No. The Department's PAM3 procedural guidance states the travel facility period can be shorter than the visa period, and that once the travel period ends the holder may remain lawfully in Australia but can no longer depart and re-enter on that visa.