Tun (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600 (Visitor) in the tourist stream, made by a 67-year-old woman seeking to visit her son, an Australian permanent resident. The decision under review was made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant met the requirements of clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause mandates that the Tribunal be satisfied that the applicant genuinely intends to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa is granted. This assessment involves considering whether the applicant has complied with the conditions of any previous substantive visa, whether they intend to comply with the conditions of the proposed visa, and any other relevant matters.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had previously visited Australia and complied with her visa conditions, a factor given some weight in support of her genuine intention. It was also satisfied that the applicant, a retired woman with rental income from properties in Myanmar and Singapore and substantial savings, would comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, specifically the prohibitions against working or studying for more than three months. In considering other relevant matters, the Tribunal took into account the economic, political, and security situation in Myanmar, as well as the applicant's options to reside outside Myanmar due to the presence of close family members in other countries.

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