Letter of Advice on Exceptional Circumstances for Visa Extension in Australia

Migration Law

Letter of Advice
To
Name: Please Insert
Address: Please Insert
Date: Please Insert
Exceptional circumstances
In this letter, the term “exceptional circumstances” would be explained to you with reference
to your application made for the extension of the visa for the purpose of your stay in
Australia. Unfortunately your application for such extension in relation to your stay has not
been accepted by the designated official entrusted with the affairs pertaining to migration.
The reason for such rejection is the non-fulfillment of the exceptional circumstances as laid
out by Sub-clause 2 of Clause 600.215 of the Migration Regulations of 1994. The term
“exceptional circumstances” means that the events which have taken place are beyond the
control of an average person. Such events are to take place in an untimely manner. Similar
chain of events took place in the Yassa case thereby resulting in the rejection of the
application for the extension of the stay in Australia for the applicant by the Administrative
Appeals Tribunal of Australia1. In this case, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia
found out that the conditions for exceptional circumstances under Sub-clause 2 of Clause
600.215 of the Migration Regulations of 1994 were not met by the applicant accordingly. As
a result, you need to satisfy the requirements of Sub-clause 2 of Clause 600.215 of the
Migration Regulations of 1994 with reference to “exceptional circumstances” thereby
presenting an in-depth analysis of the facts and circumstances of your case. It would help you
in a significant manner to prepare your case in order to be provided with a comprehensive
solution in a satisfactory manner. As a result, the scenario in your case must imply
exceptional circumstances thereby stating that the events have occurred beyond your control
and you did not expect such events to take place.
1 Yassa (Migration) [2019] AATA 1078

Policy
The policy which has been taken into consideration in your case is the Procedures Advice
Manual in order to apply the term “exceptional circumstances” as far as its meaning is
concerned. Such a policy has been formulated and implemented by the Department of
Immigration in order to govern the aspect of immigration in Australia as far as the application
of Department of Immigration. The grounds related, to serious illness, grievous injuries or
death of close family member of the applicant are key factors of “exceptional circumstances”
with reference to the extension of stay in Australia. The health in relation to the physical or
mental well-being of the applicant is also a tenet of “exceptional circumstances” as per the
policy. Additionally, you can also take into consideration the change in the circumstances of
your case which were not under your control thereby being aided in your defence in case you
wish to challenge the decision made by the official concerned which led to the rejection of
your application. You also need to furnish conclusive proof that returning to your home
country would lead to the aggravating of problems and issues based on your medical
condition related to grievous injury as imperative from the policy. Such a policy was also
taken into consideration by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia in the Yassa
case where it was concluded that the policy is just a guideline to be followed and not to be
used for statutory interpretation. In this matter, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of
Australia further asserted upon such conclusion by taking account of the decision made by
the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia in the case of Wang v Minister of Immigration and
Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs2. As a result, it is imperative that the policy plays an
important role in the application of the term “exceptional circumstances”.
Statutory interpretation
The plain meaning rule has been followed and taken into consideration in your case as far as
the principles of statutory interpretation are concerned. Such a rule is quite feasible in order
to determine the meaning of the words enshrined in the provision of the respective statute or
legislation. As a result, the plain meaning rule of interpretation implies that the words are to
be interpreted as per their general meaning as far as the language of the statute is concerned
on the basis of the scenario in question as far as providing a comprehensive solution to the
aggrieved party is concerned. In this regard, the literal meaning of the term “exceptional
2 Wang v Minister of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FMCA 918