2210574 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by a delegate of the Minister to refuse a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, to a Nigerian applicant. The delegate had found that the applicant did not genuinely intend to stay temporarily in Australia, citing concerns about her family's migration history, insufficient evidence of economic incentive to return home, outdated property ownership documents, and a lack of prior international travel. The applicant's son, who is an Australian permanent resident, sought review of this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia, as required by clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing the balance of factors that would encourage the applicant to return to Nigeria against those that might encourage her to remain in Australia. The Tribunal considered evidence regarding the applicant's stated purpose of visiting her grandchildren, her business in Nigeria, her family ties in her home country, and the offer of a security bond by her son.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the delegate had identified several concerns, the overall evidence, when weighed, supported a genuine intention to return to Nigeria. The applicant's desire to meet her grandchildren and her son, whom she had not seen since 2016, was a significant factor. She also had a business to return to, managed by another person, and substantial family ties in Nigeria, including other children and grandchildren. The Tribunal accepted her stated intention to visit for a limited period of three to six months and her explanation for not wishing to care for her son's children. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the visa applicant meets the criteria under clause 600.211.