1517659 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Residence) (Class BT) visa, where the applicant sought review of a decision not to grant the visa. The applicant was sponsored by her step-father. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant satisfied the requirements of clause 802.212(1A) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which pertains to sponsorship by a step-parent, and alternatively, whether she met the criteria under clause 802.214(1)(c) concerning full-time study after turning 18. Clause 802.212(1A) requires that a stepchild be the child of the sponsor's former spouse or de facto partner and that there be a parenting order in favour of the step-parent. Clause 802.214(1)(c) requires that an applicant over 18 years of age has been undertaking full-time study since turning 18 or within a specified period after completing secondary education.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant did not meet the criteria under clause 802.212(1A) because her mother and step-father remained in a relationship, and there was no parenting order in place. The Tribunal noted that while sponsorship by her mother might have satisfied a different criterion, the applicant was sponsored by her step-father and did not meet the specific requirements for that sponsorship. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy clause 802.214(1)(c) as she had left school at 16, was employed at 18, and commenced further studies almost two years after turning 18, ceasing them before completion. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.