BAKATA (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Bridging E (Class WE) visa, subclass 050. The applicant's eligibility for this visa was contested, particularly concerning whether they were making "acceptable arrangements to depart Australia," a key criterion under clause 050.212(2) of the relevant regulations. The Tribunal also briefly addressed an application for a Bridging (Protection Visa Applicant) visa, subclass 051, which the applicant did not meet due to not being a relevant eligible non-citizen.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the requirement of making "acceptable arrangements to depart Australia" at the time of their visa application and at the time of the decision. This involved assessing the genuineness of the applicant's intentions and the steps taken, or not taken, to facilitate their departure from Australia. The Tribunal also had to consider the applicant's history as an unlawful non-citizen who had been working and the fact that their passport had lapsed.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not demonstrated acceptable arrangements to depart. This conclusion was based on the applicant's statements to the Department indicating a desire to remain in Australia to work and explore options for a new visa. Furthermore, the applicant's history of working as an unlawful non-citizen for four years and the lapse of their passport suggested a disregard for migration laws and an intention to remain rather than depart. The Tribunal found the applicant's claim of needing to be released to arrange departure with their mother unconvincing, especially as they could not explain why this required release from detention and had not taken concrete steps like renewing their passport.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Bridging E (Class WE) visa. The applicant also failed to meet the criteria for a Bridging (Protection Visa Applicant) visa, subclass 051.