1515703 (Migration)

This matter concerned a visa application made by a person claiming to be the remaining relative of an Australian relative. The Australian relative in question was the visa applicant's sister, who was an Australian permanent resident. The dispute centred on whether the visa applicant met the definition of a "remaining relative" under the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by Michelle Grau, a Member of the tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was to determine whether the visa applicant satisfied the criteria for being a "remaining relative" of an "Australian relative" as defined by the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically for the purpose of a Subclass 115 visa. This required an assessment of whether the Australian relative was usually resident in Australia and, crucially, whether the visa applicant and their spouse or de facto partner had any "near relatives" other than those who were usually resident in Australia and were Australian citizens, permanent residents, or eligible New Zealand citizens.

The tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. It found that while the Australian relative was the sister of the applicant and was usually resident in Australia, the applicant failed to demonstrate that they and their spouse or de facto partner had no "near relatives" other than those who met the specified criteria. The tribunal noted that the visa applicant was self-sufficient and not dependent on the review applicant, and the review applicant acknowledged having family support. Consequently, the tribunal concluded that the visa applicant did not meet the prescribed criteria for the visa sought.