Sathiyamurthy (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr. Sathiyamurthy, a citizen of Malaysia, who sought to remain in Australia on a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600. The primary dispute concerned whether Mr. Sathiyamurthy met the criteria for a genuine temporary entrant, particularly in light of his stated intention to remain in Australia due to the COVID-19 pandemic and his desire to visit The Pinnacles Desert.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr. Sathiyamurthy genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted. This involved assessing whether he had complied substantially with the conditions of his last substantive visa and any subsequent bridging visa, whether he intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, and any other relevant matters. The specific conditions of the Subclass 600 visa in question were that he must not work in Australia (condition 8101) and must not engage in study or training for more than three months (condition 8201).

The Tribunal found that Mr. Sathiyamurthy had substantially complied with the conditions of his previous visas, which was given some weight. While the Tribunal accepted his declaration that he did not intend to undertake studies, it was not satisfied that he intended to comply with condition 8101. This was due to a lack of independent and credible evidence demonstrating his adequate means of financial support during his intended stay. The provided bank statement screenshots were insufficient as they did not identify the account holder or the currency of the funds, and no witnesses offered support. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr. Sathiyamurthy had the financial means to support himself, leading to the affirmation of the decision under review.