Wszola (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Visitor (Class FA) visa, Subclass 600, made by an applicant seeking to visit her mother and stepfather in Australia. The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the genuine temporary entrant (GTE) requirement under clause 600.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was sought. This involved assessing whether the applicant had complied substantially with the conditions of her last substantive visa and any subsequent bridging visa, and whether she intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 600 visa, including not working, not studying for more than three months, not being entitled to a substantive visa while remaining in Australia, and departing Australia before her permitted stay expired.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal considered the applicant's personal circumstances, including her age, her committed relationship in Thailand, her responsibilities for her grandfather and younger brother, and her unemployment due to the global pandemic. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had graduated in 2019, had been employed but lost her job due to lockdowns, and had since established a small online business with financial support from her sponsors. The Tribunal also took into account the assurances of the sponsor's husband, an Australian Permanent Resident and partner in an accounting firm, who offered to provide financial support and assured the applicant's compliance with visa conditions and her departure. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under clause 600.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.