Clappier (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600, tourist stream. The applicant sought to continue travelling in Australia, stating they had not had sufficient time to complete a road trip. The delegate refused the visa application, finding that the applicant had not met the requirements of regulation 600.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994. The applicant sought review of this decision before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied regulation 600.215, which requires exceptional circumstances for the grant of a visitor visa if the applicant would be authorised to stay in Australia for more than 12 consecutive months. The Tribunal was also required to consider whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had been in Australia continuously since 11 January 2019, having last entered on a Working Holiday visa. The current application for a visitor visa would result in an extended stay beyond 12 consecutive months. The applicant's stated reason for the extended stay was to continue travelling and complete a road trip. The delegate had found that exceptional circumstances did not exist. The applicant failed to attend a hearing before the Tribunal and did not provide any further material after February 2020, nor did they respond to a request for confirmation of their intention to continue the application and provide updated contact details, noting that records indicated their departure from Australia. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that exceptional circumstances existed, nor that the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600, tourist stream, finding that the requirements of regulation 600.215 were not met.