Chen (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, made by a visa applicant seeking to visit family in Australia. The review applicant, who is the visa applicant's sister and an Australian citizen, assisted in the application. The core dispute before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates satisfaction that the applicant genuinely intends to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa is granted.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant had complied substantially with the conditions of her last substantive visa, whether she intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, and to consider any other relevant matters. The Tribunal considered the visa applicant's history of compliant travel to Australia, her stable employment with prospects for promotion, her relationship and impending engagement to a Philippine national, and her current permanent residency in the Philippines. The Tribunal also took into account the circumstances of the visa applicant's parents, who hold Australian Contributory Parent (Temporary) Visas and were considering their future residency options.

The Tribunal found that the visa applicant and review applicant were credible witnesses, with their oral testimony supported by documentary evidence, including the visa applicant's renewed Philippine Special Resident Retiree's Visa and recent payslips. The Tribunal was satisfied that the visa applicant genuinely intended to visit Australia temporarily for a family visit and had no present or future intention to reside permanently in Australia. The Tribunal concluded that the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa for reconsideration, with a direction that the visa applicant meets the criteria under clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.