1603016 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa by a 58-year-old Lebanese citizen. The review applicant, who is the visa applicant's daughter and an Australian citizen, sought to have her mother visit her and her family in Australia for three months. The dispute before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates satisfaction that the applicant genuinely intends to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa is granted.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia, considering her compliance with visa conditions, her intention to comply with the conditions of the proposed visa, and any other relevant matters. The purpose of the visit was to see her daughter, son-in-law, three grandchildren, and her husband, who were all in Australia. The visa applicant's family in Lebanon, including her husband and son, were financially comfortable and supported her. The visa applicant had visited Australia once previously in 2005, and her daughter had visited her in Lebanon twice.

The Tribunal found the oral evidence of both the visa applicant and the review applicant to be credible and persuasive, noting consistency between their testimonies. Based on this evidence, the Tribunal accepted the factual circumstances presented, including the visa applicant's family situation in Lebanon and her close relationships there. The Tribunal concluded that the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the stated purpose and therefore met the requirements of clause 600.211. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the visa applicant met this criterion.