1914622 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Bridging E visa (Class WE) made by an unlawful non-citizen. The applicant sought to remain in Australia while a substantive visa application was being processed. The primary dispute concerned whether the applicant would abide by the conditions of a Bridging E visa, given their past criminal conduct.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for a Bridging E visa, specifically whether they satisfied the time of application and time of decision criteria, and whether they would abide by any imposed conditions. This involved assessing whether the applicant was an unlawful non-citizen, had made a valid application for a substantive visa that remained undetermined, and had been interviewed by an authorised officer. Crucially, the Tribunal had to consider the applicant's past criminal convictions and behaviour to assess their likelihood of complying with visa conditions.

The Tribunal found that the applicant met the technical requirements for the Bridging E visa, including being an unlawful non-citizen, having an undetermined substantive visa application, and having undergone the required interview. However, the Tribunal determined that the applicant's history of criminal convictions, including driving on a suspended licence and causing serious injury, and breaches of family violence intervention orders, demonstrated a lack of contrition and a propensity to disregard legal obligations. The Tribunal concluded that, based on this history, it could not be satisfied that the applicant would abide by the conditions of a Bridging E visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant's application for a Bridging E visa was refused.