2112196 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Business Skills (Provisional) visa (Subclass 188). The applicant sought to be recognised as a member of the family unit of the primary applicant, his father. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the definition of a "member of the family unit" under the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically in relation to dependency requirements for a child over 23 years of age.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant, who was over 23 years of age, was "wholly or substantially reliant" on his father for financial support due to being "incapacitated for work" due to mental health issues, as stipulated by regulation 1.12(2)(b)(iii) and regulation 1.05A(1)(b) of the Migration Regulations. This required an assessment of the applicant's reliance on his father for financial support and the extent to which his mental health condition rendered him incapacitated for work.

The Tribunal considered the evidence presented and applied the relevant legislative definitions. It found that while the applicant had mental health issues, the evidence did not establish that he was wholly or substantially reliant on his father for financial support due to being incapacitated for work. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for being a member of the family unit under the relevant regulations.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant was not granted the Business Skills (Provisional) visa as a member of the family unit.