The Bridging Visa C (BVC, subclass 030) allows a person who was an unlawful non-citizen — someone in Australia without a valid visa — to remain in Australia lawfully while a substantive visa application they have lodged is being processed. It serves the same protective function as the Bridging Visa A (BVA) but applies specifically to people who were not holding a valid visa at the time they applied for the substantive visa. Without a BVC (or another valid visa), an unlawful non-citizen who lodged a visa application would remain unlawful during the processing period. The BVC carries important limitations: it does not allow the holder to travel outside Australia (travel causes the BVC to cease), and work rights are not automatically granted. This page explains who receives a BVC, how it differs from other bridging visas, and the conditions that typically apply.

For current BVC details, refer to the DHA Bridging Visa C page.

• Migration Act 1958, s 67 — the circumstances in which bridging visas are granted; DHA has discretion to grant a bridging visa to allow a person to remain lawfully in Australia pending a decision on their substantive visa
• Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, Subclass 030 criteria — the criteria for the grant of a Bridging Visa C, including the requirement that the applicant is applying for a substantive visa while in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen
• Migration Act 1958, s 13 — definition of unlawful non-citizen: a non-citizen in the migration zone who is not the holder of a valid visa
• Migration Act 1958, s 195A and s 197C — the framework for detention and removal of unlawful non-citizens; the BVC prevents unlawful status and the detention consequences that flow from it
• DHA: Bridging Visa C (subclass 030) — immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/bridging-visa-c-030

What makes someone an unlawful non-citizen

Under the Migration Act 1958, a non-citizen in Australia is unlawful if they are not holding a valid visa. Common situations that result in unlawful status include:

• Overstaying — remaining in Australia after a visa has expired
• Visa cancellation — having a visa cancelled (e.g. for breach of conditions)
• Never holding a valid visa — entering without authorisation
• A bridging visa ceasing — for example, departing Australia on a BVA causes the BVA to cease

Unlawful non-citizens are subject to detention and removal under the Migration Act. The BVC provides a pathway back to lawful status for those who wish to apply for a substantive visa while in Australia.

BVC vs BVA — the key distinction

The most important practical distinction in Australian bridging visa law is between the BVA and BVC:

• Bridging Visa A (BVA, subclass 010): granted when a person applies for a new substantive visa while they are currently lawful — that is, while they hold a valid visa (including another BVA); the BVA maintains their lawful status during processing
• Bridging Visa C (BVC, subclass 030): granted when a person applies for a substantive visa while they are unlawful — they do not hold any valid visa at the time of the application; the BVC converts them from unlawful to lawful pending the decision

In both cases, the bridging visa allows the person to remain lawfully in Australia until the substantive application is determined. Once the substantive visa is decided — whether granted or refused — the bridging visa ceases.

How a BVC is obtained

A BVC may be granted automatically or by application, depending on the circumstances:

• When an unlawful non-citizen lodges a valid application for certain substantive visas (such as a partner visa or a protection visa) while in Australia, a BVC may be granted automatically at the same time
• In other cases, the person may need to specifically apply for the BVC; the online bridging visa application form (for BVA, BVB, and BVC) is available through ImmiAccount
• The grant of a BVC is discretionary — DHA must be satisfied that the person is an unlawful non-citizen who has made a valid application for a substantive visa

No travel rights — BVC and departure

A critical feature of the BVC is that it does not permit the holder to travel outside Australia. If a BVC holder departs Australia, the BVC ceases — the person becomes unlawful on departure and cannot re-enter on the BVC. This is the same restriction as applies to the BVA. If travel is essential, the holder may be able to apply for a Bridging Visa B (BVB, subclass 020) before departing, but a BVB is not available to everyone and has its own eligibility requirements. For details, see the BVB page.

Work rights under the BVC

Work rights under a BVC are not automatic. Whether a BVC holder has work authorisation depends on the conditions attached to the BVC by DHA. Key points:

• DHA may grant work rights (condition 8101 not imposed or waived) if the underlying substantive application supports it — for example, an unlawful non-citizen who has lodged a work visa application may receive work rights on the BVC
• Applicants who need work rights should request them when applying for the BVC or when seeking a variation of BVC conditions; DHA considers whether granting work rights is appropriate in the circumstances
• Where no work rights are attached, the BVC holder is in the same position as other no-work visa holders — working without authorisation is a visa breach

What happens when the substantive visa is decided

The BVC ceases when the substantive visa application is finally determined:

• Substantive visa granted: the person becomes the holder of the substantive visa; the BVC ceases automatically
• Substantive visa refused: the BVC ceases; the person typically becomes an unlawful non-citizen again unless they hold another valid visa or there is a bridging visa in place for the refusal period
• If the substantive application is refused and the person has appeal rights, a Bridging Visa E (BVE) may be available to maintain lawful status during the appeal period — see the BVE page

Schedule 3 criteria and unlawful applicants

For some visa subclasses (particularly certain family visas), unlawful applicants face additional eligibility barriers under Schedule 3 of the Migration Regulations. Schedule 3 imposes additional criteria on certain unlawful non-citizens applying for visas — these criteria may require the applicant to demonstrate compelling reasons for the grant. The grant of a BVC does not waive the Schedule 3 requirements for the underlying substantive visa. For details on Schedule 3, see the Schedule 3 criteria page.

The BVC is often described as one of the less well-understood bridging visas — practitioners frequently encounter clients who have allowed their substantive visa to expire and then applied for a new visa while unlawful, not realising that a BVC may have been granted (or needed to be applied for) at that point. The distinction between BVA and BVC matters because it reflects the person's migration history — unlawful status, even briefly, can have consequences for future visa applications (for example, certain visa criteria require that the applicant not have been unlawful, or imposing Schedule 3 requirements). The no-travel feature is a significant trap: unlawful non-citizens who are waiting for a substantive visa decision and who depart Australia on a BVC will find the BVC has ceased and they cannot re-enter on it. For current BVC criteria, work rights conditions, and how to apply, refer to the DHA Bridging Visa C page.