1838023 (Migration)

The applicant, a Malaysian national, sought review of a decision not to grant him a Bridging E (Class WE) visa. The dispute centred on whether the applicant would abide by the conditions of such a visa, particularly the "No Work" condition (8101), given his past immigration history, including working without permission and engaging in criminal conduct. The matter was heard by James Silva, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was satisfied, pursuant to clause 050.223 of the Migration Regulations, that the applicant would abide by any conditions imposed on a Bridging E visa. This required the Tribunal to consider the applicant's likely future conduct, taking into account his past immigration history, previous breaches of immigration laws, the significance and wilfulness of those breaches, and any mitigating circumstances or contrition. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the imposition of a security would incentivise compliance.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's past conduct, including working without permission and his lack of financial resources, indicated a high motivation to work in the future, even in breach of visa conditions. His claims of support from a cousin were considered vague and speculative, and his hope for Centrelink benefits was deemed uncertain. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant would abide by the "No Work" condition, nor did it believe that any security would act as an incentive for compliance. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Bridging E visa.