Dang (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by the Department of Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicant a Subclass 050 Bridging E visa. The applicant had a complex immigration history involving criminal offences, imprisonment, and immigration detention. The central dispute concerned whether the applicant met the eligibility criteria for a Bridging E visa, specifically whether he was making acceptable arrangements to depart Australia or had made or would make a substantive visa application within the allowed timeframe.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied any of the eligibility criteria for a Bridging E visa as set out in clauses 050.212(2) to (9) of the Migration Regulations 1994. These criteria included making acceptable arrangements to depart Australia or having made, or intending to make, a substantive visa application within a specified period. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant would abide by any conditions imposed on a bridging visa, and if not, whether a security would satisfy the Tribunal of his compliance.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not yet made a substantive visa application, although he expressed an intention to marry his partner and apply for a Partner Visa (Subclass 820) following his release from detention. His legal representative indicated a need for three weeks to lodge such an application. However, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had not taken steps to regularise his status after his student visa was cancelled, nor had he made a substantive visa application within any extended time limit. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a Bridging E visa, nor did he meet the requirements for a Subclass 051 Bridging (Protection Visa Applicant) visa, as he was not an eligible non-citizen.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Department's decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 050 Bridging E visa.