2213140 (Migration)

The applicant, an unlawful non-citizen, sought judicial review of a decision to affirm the refusal of a Bridging E (Class WE) visa. The applicant had remained in Australia unlawfully on multiple occasions and demonstrated extensive non-compliance with Australia's migration laws. The applicant did not wish to depart Australia and had made no arrangements to do so, nor did the applicant have a current visa application that had not been finally determined.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision to refuse the Bridging E visa was affected by jurisdictional error. This required the Court to consider whether the delegate had properly applied the relevant legislative criteria for granting such a visa, particularly in light of the applicant's history of non-compliance and lack of intention to depart Australia.

The Court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding no jurisdictional error. The delegate had correctly applied the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The Court noted that a Bridging E visa is intended to facilitate departure or the resolution of a visa application, neither of which applied to the applicant's circumstances. The applicant's extensive non-compliance and expressed intention to remain in Australia unlawfully weighed heavily against the grant of a bridging visa.