Rahaman (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600 (Visitor), before the Tribunal. The applicant sought to visit her husband and child in Australia. The central issue was whether the applicant met the criteria under cl 600.211 of the Regulations, specifically whether she genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted.

The Tribunal was required to consider whether the applicant had complied substantially with the conditions of any previous substantive or bridging visas, whether she intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, and any other relevant matters. The applicant had no prior travel history to Australia but had travelled internationally 19 times to eight countries, which the Tribunal considered demonstrated compliance with visitor visa conditions. However, the Tribunal also considered that the applicant's long-term aspirations, including the potential for her family to settle in Australia given her Australian citizen spouse, were a relevant factor.

Despite acknowledging the potential for the applicant's family to settle in Australia in the future, the Tribunal ultimately found that these long-term aspirations did not detract from the applicant's current genuine intention to visit Australia temporarily. The Tribunal also considered the conditions to which the visa would be subject, including not working, not studying for more than three months, not being entitled to a substantive visa while remaining in Australia, and not remaining in Australia after the end of the permitted stay. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of cl 600.211. The Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met the specified criteria.