Augerea (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning a child, the review applicant, who was born in Papua New Guinea and held PNG citizenship. The applicant, represented by Mr Peter Augerea, an Australian citizen, had applied for a subclass 600 visitor visa. The applicant had previously entered Australia on visitor visas and her current visa application was made in June 2018, with a bridging visa A granted in association. The application was refused by the delegate on the basis that the applicant did not meet clause 600.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires exceptional circumstances for the grant of a visa if it would result in the applicant staying in Australia for more than 12 months consecutively.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify granting the subclass 600 visa, as required by clause 600.215. This clause is engaged because the applicant's intended stay in Australia, if the visa were granted, would exceed 12 months consecutively. The Tribunal was required to assess the evidence presented, including documentation relating to an adoption process in both Papua New Guinea and Australia, to determine if the threshold of exceptional circumstances was met.

The Tribunal considered evidence that the applicant had been in the care of Mr and Mrs Augerea, who are Australian citizens, since she was a baby. An adoption order was granted in Papua New Guinea in October 2015, and Mr Augerea is the paternal uncle of the child's biological mother. Northern Territory Wide Services for Territory Families assessed the Augereas' adoption application and provided a letter stating that exceptional circumstances existed, including that the Augereas had been the child's parents since birth and had adopted her legally and traditionally in PNG. However, the Tribunal concluded that these circumstances did not meet the threshold for exceptional circumstances as required by clause 600.215. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant was not eligible for the grant of the visa sought.

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