Amestica Merino (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Amestica Merino, who sought an Extended Eligibility (Temporary) (Class TK) visa, specifically a Subclass 445 (Dependent Child) visa. The core of the dispute was whether Ms. Merino qualified as a child of a visa-holding parent, as required for this visa subclass. The applicant's mother had previously held a Subclass 820 visa, but this ceased to be valid upon the grant of a Subclass 801 visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the eligibility criteria for the Subclass 445 visa, particularly in light of the change in her mother's visa status. This involved assessing whether the applicant could be considered a "child" in the context of the relevant migration regulations and ministerial guidelines, and whether the specific circumstances warranted a discretionary decision under the Department's Procedures Advice Manual (PAM3).

The Tribunal, applying the ministerial guidelines, concluded that the applicant's circumstances did not fall within the scope of those guidelines for discretionary referral. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. The Tribunal noted that the applicant retained the option to make a direct request to the Minister.