EL LAKISS (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600 (Visitor) in the tourist stream. The applicant sought to visit family in Australia. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted.

The Tribunal was required to assess several factors under clause 600.211. These included whether the applicant had complied substantially with the conditions of any previous substantive or bridging visas, whether the applicant intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa (namely, not to work or study for more than three months), and any other relevant matters. The Tribunal noted the absence of evidence regarding previous Australian visas, giving this factor no weight. It was satisfied that the applicant posed a low risk of breaching the work or study conditions of the visa.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal gave substantial positive weight to the applicant's multiple compliant travel history to other countries, particularly Belgium, to visit her daughter. This demonstrated a pattern of adhering to visa conditions and returning to her home country. Conversely, the Tribunal accorded some adverse weight to the fact that the applicant did not have a job and her husband was retired, suggesting a lack of employment obligations tying them to their home country. Despite these considerations, the Tribunal ultimately found that the applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211. The Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211.