1514768 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the applications of Mr. Ahmad El Sahmarani and Mrs. Fatme El Sahmarani, citizens of Lebanon, for Visitor visas (Subclass 600). The applicants, a married couple aged 59 and 60 respectively, sought to visit their son and his family in Melbourne for up to three months. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted, as required by clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicants had substantially complied with the conditions of any previous substantive or bridging visas, and whether they intended to comply with the conditions of the proposed Subclass 600 visa. The conditions relevant to the Subclass 600 visa included not working in Australia, not engaging in study or training for more than three months, not being entitled to a substantive visa (other than a protection visa) while remaining in Australia, and not remaining in Australia after the end of their permitted stay.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal noted that the first applicant had no prior travel history to Australia. The second applicant had previously visited Australia twice on Visitor visas and had departed before the expiry of both visas, demonstrating a history of compliance with visa conditions. The Tribunal found no evidence of non-compliance by the second applicant with the conditions of her previous visas. Regarding potential concerns about compliance, the Tribunal considered that a delegate had the discretion to impose a bond to address such concerns. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the applications for Visitor (Class FA) visas for reconsideration, directing that the visa applicants meet the criteria under clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.