Vu (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa by a Vietnamese citizen who had become an unlawful non-citizen in Australia after his student visa ceased. The applicant was subsequently arrested and charged with importing a border-controlled precursor, leading to his detention. While in criminal custody, he was granted a Bridging E visa. Upon his release on bail, this bridging visa ceased, and he was placed in immigration detention as an unlawful non-citizen. He then applied for another Bridging E visa, asserting he was making acceptable arrangements to depart Australia. The delegate refused this application, finding the applicant did not satisfy specific criteria for either Subclass 050 or Subclass 051 of the Bridging E visa.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa, specifically whether he was making acceptable arrangements to depart Australia under clause 050.212(2) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), and whether he satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 051 (Bridging (Protection Visa Applicant)) visa under clause 051.211. The Tribunal also considered clause 050.223, which the delegate had relied upon in refusing the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the Bridging E visa. It found that while the applicant may have been making acceptable arrangements to depart Australia, he did not satisfy the criteria for a Subclass 051 visa. The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicant's inability to meet the specific requirements of the Subclass 051 visa, which was one of the subclasses available within the Bridging E (Class WE) visa at the time of his application. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements for the grant of the visa.