De Souza (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa (subclass 600, Tourist stream) made by a citizen of Brazil. The applicant had previously held student visas and sought an extended stay in Australia for tourism. The Department had refused the visa, and the applicant sought review by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of tourism. This required the Tribunal to consider the applicant's compliance with the conditions of his previous substantive visa, his intention to comply with the conditions of the proposed visitor visa, and any other relevant matters. A secondary issue was whether the applicant had adequate funds or access to adequate funds to support his stay, as required by clause 600.212.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant had no adverse migration history and had provided evidence of funds at the time of his application, several factors raised concerns about his genuine temporary entrant status. These included his prolonged stay in Australia (approximately two years and eight months with a short break), his failure to purchase a return ticket to Brazil, and his expressed desire for a further extended stay beyond his original proposed departure date. The Tribunal also noted a lack of current evidence regarding his financial situation, leading to concerns that he might work in Australia during his visit and that he did not have adequate funds for the remainder of his proposed stay.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the visa, finding that the applicant had not satisfied the requirements of clauses 600.211 and 600.212.