Reinaldo (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600 (Visitor) in the Tourist stream. The applicant sought to review a decision concerning their eligibility for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates satisfaction 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 substantially complied with the conditions of their last substantive visa or any subsequent bridging visa, whether they intend to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, and any other relevant matters.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had substantially complied with the conditions of their previous visas, including a Subclass 462 Work and Holiday (Temporary) visa and a subsequent Bridging A visa. Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant understood and intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, specifically conditions 8101 (must not work in Australia) and 8201 (must not engage in study or training for more than 3 months). The Tribunal also considered other relevant matters, including the applicant's stated intention to travel for three months, the disruption to travel plans caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the provision of an e-ticket showing a flight booked to depart Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211. The Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant meets this specific criterion.