Bhullar (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600 (tourist stream), made by an applicant who did not hold a substantive visa at the time of lodgement. The applicant had arrived in Australia in December 2018 on a tourist visa which expired on 3 March 2019. He applied for the subclass 600 visa on 3 April 2019, stating he had misunderstood and miscalculated his visa expiry date. The decision under review was affirmed by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Nora Lamont.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of the subclass 600 visa, specifically clause 600.223(2) of the Migration Regulations, and the associated Schedule 3 criteria, particularly criterion 3004. These provisions require that if an applicant does not hold a substantive visa at the time of application, the Minister must be satisfied that the applicant is not in that position due to factors beyond their control, that there are compelling reasons for granting the visa, and that the applicant has substantially complied with visa conditions.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's explanation for not holding a substantive visa at the time of his application – a misunderstanding and miscalculation of his visa expiry date – did not constitute factors beyond his control, nor did it present compelling reasons for the late lodgement. The applicant also stated he had minimal financial resources and relied on his brother and friends for support, and that his family would assist with his return to India. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met Schedule 3 criterion 3004 or clause 600.223(2) of the Migration Regulations.

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