Alfasi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of an applicant seeking a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600. The applicant had previously entered Australia on a Subclass 462 Working Holiday visa and wished to extend their travel within Australia. The applicant did not attend a scheduled hearing, and consequently, the Tribunal was unable to discuss their circumstances or reasons for seeking the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a subclass 600 visa, specifically clause 600.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause requires exceptional circumstances for the grant of the visa if it would result in the applicant being authorised to stay in Australia for more than 12 consecutive months as the holder of certain specified visas, including visitor visas, Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visas, Subclass 462 (Work and Holiday) visas, and bridging visas. A further issue was whether clause 600.411 of the Regulations was met, which requires an applicant to be in Australia at the time of grant if they were in Australia at the time of application.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had previously held a Subclass 462 visa and was granted a bridging visa A in association with their subclass 600 application. The grant of the subclass 600 visa would therefore result in the applicant exceeding the 12-month consecutive stay limit under the specified visas. The Tribunal found that the applicant's stated reason for seeking the visa, to "travel more in the east coast, and through the west coast," did not constitute exceptional circumstances, interpreting "exceptional" in its ordinary English meaning as unusual or extraordinary. Furthermore, departmental records indicated the applicant had departed Australia, meaning clause 600.411 was not satisfied.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Visitor (Class FA) visa.