Adzraku (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa, Subclass 101, made by Portia, who claimed to be the dependent child of James Mawuzi Adzraku. The dispute centred on whether Portia was indeed the dependent child of Mr Adzraku, and therefore sponsored by an eligible person, as required by the visa criteria. The decision was made by Michelle Grau, a Member of the tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was to determine if Portia met the definition of a "dependent child" as defined in regulation 1.03 of the Migration Regulations 1994, and if she was in a relevant child-parent relationship with Mr Adzraku, as stipulated by criterion cl.101.211. This involved assessing whether Portia was under 25 years of age, whether she was financially dependent on Mr Adzraku if over 18, or incapacitated for work, and crucially, whether she was the biological child or step-child of Mr Adzraku.

The tribunal considered a birth certificate showing Portia's birth in Ghana in 1999 with Mr Adzraku as her father, however, this certificate was issued in 2011. Significant concerns were raised due to Mr Adzraku not having declared Portia in previous visa applications. Despite multiple requests from the Department of Immigration and subsequently the tribunal for DNA evidence to establish the claimed relationship, no such evidence was provided. The tribunal noted that Portia's family had reportedly refused to consent to DNA testing. Without this crucial evidence, and given the other discrepancies, the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimed relationship existed, nor that Portia met the criteria for alternative subclasses such as adopted child or orphan relative.

Consequently, the tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Portia the Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa.