Hasan (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by a visa applicant regarding the refusal of a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant, a Syrian national residing in a government-controlled area of Syria, genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia. The decision was made by Frances Simmons, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 600 visa, specifically concerning the genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia. This involved assessing whether the applicant had strong incentives to return to Syria, despite the ongoing conflict, and whether the security situation in his home country presented a disincentive to return. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's family ties, property ownership, and income in Syria as factors influencing his intention to return.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the conflict in Syria is serious, each case must be assessed on its individual circumstances, rather than making broad assumptions about Syrian nationals. It accepted that the applicant lived in a relatively stable, government-controlled area and had substantial family ties, including his wife and children, and property interests in Syria, all of which provided strong incentives for his return. The Tribunal also noted the willingness of the review applicant to meet any imposed security bond, considering this would further encourage compliance. Applying the principle from *Khanam v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship* [2009] FCA 966, the Tribunal focused on the specific circumstances of the applicant.

Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia and remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.