2012130 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Residence) (Class BT) visa, Subclass 802, brought by the applicant, who sought to establish that they were a dependent child of the sponsor, an Australian permanent resident. The applicant was born in the Philippines, and their father, the sponsor, resided in Australia. The applicant also had other family members in the Philippines and a sister in Australia, and their grandmother had resided in Australia until her passing in October 2021. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for being a "dependent child" as defined by the Migration Regulations 1994.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant qualified as a "dependent child" of the sponsor at the time of application and decision, considering the definition of dependency in Regulation 1.05A, which requires substantial reliance for basic needs and that this reliance is greater than any other source of support. Secondly, the court needed to assess whether the applicant had, since turning 18 or within a reasonable time after completing Year 12, undertaken a full-time course of study leading to a professional, trade, or vocational qualification.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. The reasoning focused on the definition of "dependent child" under Regulation 1.05A. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not been wholly or substantially reliant on the sponsor for financial support to meet basic needs for a substantial period immediately preceding the application. Crucially, the evidence indicated that support for the applicant came from multiple family members over time, and this reliance was not demonstrably greater than reliance on other sources. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's educational status, but the primary basis for affirming the decision was the failure to establish the requisite degree of dependency on the sponsor.