Hajtamiri (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600 (Sponsored Family stream), made by a visa applicant who claimed to be the biological sister of the review applicant. The visa applicant sought to visit Australia for up to three months. The decision was made by Brendan Darcy, a Member of the Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that the Tribunal must be satisfied that the visa applicant genuinely intends to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa is granted. This assessment requires consideration of whether the applicant has complied with the conditions of any previous substantive or bridging visas, whether they intend to comply with the conditions of the proposed visa, and any other relevant matters.

The Tribunal considered that the visa applicant had previously visited Australia in 2012 on a visitor visa and had departed before its expiry, with no evidence of non-compliance. This was weighed favourably towards her intention to visit temporarily. The Tribunal also noted that the visa applicant was a widow with no dependent children and no property, but had a supportive family and employment in Tehran. However, it also acknowledged that the deteriorating economic and political situation in Iran, coupled with her working in Canada on a temporary visa, suggested she might have incentives to seek work outside Iran, which could indicate a lack of strong incentives to return to Iran. Despite these considerations, the Tribunal ultimately found that the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia and that the requirements of clause 600.211 were met.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa for reconsideration, with a direction that the visa applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211.