ALDHAHER (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 5676
•18 December 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
ALDHAHER (Migration) [2018] AATA 5676
[2018] AATA 5676
18 December 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 309, made by Dr Ali Mahjoub Abdullah Abdullah, sponsored by his wife, Mrs Najla Mahmoud Abdullah Aldhaher. The primary applicant's twin son and daughter, Mr Muataz Ali Mahjoub Mahjoub and Ms Sara Ali Mahjoub, applied as dependants. The delegate refused the visa application, and this refusal was subsequently reviewed by the Tribunal.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the visa applicants, aged 30, were members of the family unit of the primary applicant at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision, as required by clauses 309.311 and 309.321 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This required determining if they met the definition of 'dependent' under regulation 1.05A(a), which necessitates being wholly or substantially reliant on the primary applicant for financial support for basic needs, and for this reliance to be greater than on any other person or source.
The Tribunal found that the visa applicants were indeed the twin son and daughter of the primary applicant and review applicant. It considered evidence that the applicants, despite being 30 years of age and highly educated, were substantially reliant on their father for food, clothing, and shelter, and were prohibited from working by Yemeni visa conditions. The Tribunal noted that the applicants were residing in Turkey on visitor visas and were not in a relationship. Given the evidence presented, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister. The Tribunal remitted the applications for Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicants met the criteria under cl.309.311 and cl.309.321 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the visa applicants, aged 30, were members of the family unit of the primary applicant at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision, as required by clauses 309.311 and 309.321 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This required determining if they met the definition of 'dependent' under regulation 1.05A(a), which necessitates being wholly or substantially reliant on the primary applicant for financial support for basic needs, and for this reliance to be greater than on any other person or source.
The Tribunal found that the visa applicants were indeed the twin son and daughter of the primary applicant and review applicant. It considered evidence that the applicants, despite being 30 years of age and highly educated, were substantially reliant on their father for food, clothing, and shelter, and were prohibited from working by Yemeni visa conditions. The Tribunal noted that the applicants were residing in Turkey on visitor visas and were not in a relationship. Given the evidence presented, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister. The Tribunal remitted the applications for Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the visa applicants met the criteria under cl.309.311 and cl.309.321 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
-
Natural Justice
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
ALDHAHER (Migration) [2018] AATA 5676
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
Al Naqi v MIAC
[2007] FMCA 874
Huynh v MIMIA
[2006] FCAFC 122
Kauri Timber Co (Tas) Pty Ltd v Reeman
[1973] HCA 8