Kalache (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, subclass 600, in the Sponsored Family stream. The applicant sought to visit his sister and her family in Australia. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the genuine temporary stay criterion under clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of visiting his sister, having regard to his compliance with previous visa conditions, his intention to comply with future visa conditions, and any other relevant matters. Specifically, the Tribunal examined whether the applicant had substantially complied with the conditions of his last substantive visa and any subsequent bridging visa, and whether he intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, including not working in Australia, not studying for more than three months, not remaining in Australia after the end of his permitted stay, and not being entitled to a substantive visa while remaining in Australia.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had substantially complied with the conditions of his Bridging visa E, which had expired, as he departed Australia before its expiry and there was no evidence of any breach. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, noting his accommodation and financial support from his sister and her husband, and his access to sufficient funds for a short visit. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia.

The Tribunal remitted the application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa for reconsideration, with a direction that the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.