Humphris (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600. The review applicant was Mrs Hiwot Humphris, the sister of the visa applicant. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted, as required by clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations. The Tribunal also had to determine whether the review applicant, Dr Phillip Humphris, had standing to apply for a review, which was found not to be the case as he was the brother-in-law and not a 'relative' as defined for the purpose of the review.

The Tribunal was required to assess various factors to determine if the visa applicant was a genuine temporary entrant. These factors included whether the applicant had complied with the conditions of any previous visas, whether she intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, and any other relevant matters. The Tribunal considered evidence regarding the visa applicant's ties to her home country of Ethiopia, including her family relationships, her ongoing business importing textiles, and her employment. The Tribunal also took into account her travel history and the fact that she had no children and had been married for approximately three years.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the visa applicant's circumstances in Ethiopia. It noted that the visa applicant was employed by Ethiopian Airlines as a pilot and ran a textile import business, employing one person and with occasional assistance from a niece. The Tribunal was provided with a letter confirming that the niece could manage the business during the applicant's proposed three-week visit. The Tribunal also heard that the visa applicant had no expressed fear of harm in Ethiopia and had travelled extensively overseas for work and leisure, including to Thailand and Europe. Despite the visa applicant's sister being a permanent resident in Australia, the Tribunal ultimately concluded that the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the visa applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, finding that she genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of the visa.