2429896 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa. The applicant sought to meet the criteria under clause 050.212(3) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires an applicant to have made a valid application for a substantive visa that has not been finally determined, or to satisfy the Tribunal that they would apply for such a visa. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant continued to satisfy the relevant criteria at the time of the decision, as required by clause 050.221.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the eligibility requirements for a Bridging E visa, specifically focusing on whether the applicant had made a valid application for a substantive visa that remained undetermined. The Tribunal also had to assess if the applicant continued to satisfy the visa grant criteria at the time of the decision, and whether any exceptions to the interview requirement under clause 050.222 applied.

The Tribunal found that the applicant met clause 050.211 as they were an unlawful non-citizen at the time of application. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant had an ongoing application for a Permanent Protection (XA 866) visa, which is a substantive visa that can be granted in Australia and had not been finally determined. This satisfied clause 050.212(3). The Tribunal also found that the applicant continued to satisfy both clauses 050.211 and 050.212 at the time of the decision, thus meeting clause 050.221. However, the Tribunal noted that the application was also for a Subclass 051 (Bridging (Protection Visa Applicant)) visa, which the applicant did not meet the criteria for.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Bridging E (Class WE) visa.