Viviet (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, made by the applicant who sought to remain in Australia to finish his visit after a working holiday. The decision under review was affirmed by the Tribunal.

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

The Tribunal considered the applicant's history, including multiple Working Holiday visas and periods of stay in Australia. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that two years had passed since the applicant originally applied for the visitor visa, during which time he had remained in Australia. Despite the stated purpose of "finishing his visit," the extended duration of his presence, particularly after the original application, raised significant doubts about his genuine intention to remain only temporarily. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was sought, and therefore found that clause 600.211 was not met. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.