Ahmadi (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa, Subclass 101, by a visa applicant who was 21 years old at the time of application. The review applicant, who was the visa applicant's father, sought review of the decision not to grant the visa. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the visa applicant met the study requirements for the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant had, since turning 18 or within a reasonable time after completing the equivalent of Australian Year 12, been undertaking a full-time course of study leading to a professional, trade, or vocational qualification, or alternatively, was incapacitated for work. The visa applicant's age at the time of application was 21, and the application was made on 12 February 2017. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the relationship and full-time work criteria.

The Tribunal found that the visa applicant met the criteria regarding relationship status and not being engaged in full-time work, based on the oral evidence provided by both the visa applicant and the review applicant. However, the Tribunal concluded that the visa applicant did not meet the study requirements under cl.101.213(1)(c) of the Migration Regulations 1994. The evidence presented did not demonstrate that the applicant had been undertaking a full-time course of study since turning 18 or within a reasonable time after completing Year 12. Furthermore, the applicant was not incapacitated for work.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicant a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa, Subclass 101, as the criteria for the grant of the visa were not met. No claims were advanced in respect of other visa subclasses within Class AH.