Chan (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Business Skills (Provisional) visa (Subclass 188). The applicant sought to be recognised as a member of the family unit of the primary visa applicant. The Tribunal, constituted by Susan Trotter, was required to determine whether the applicant met the definition of "member of the family unit" under the relevant migration regulations.

The central legal issue was whether the applicant, who was the adult daughter of the primary visa applicant and currently employed as a pharmacist, was "dependent" on the primary visa applicant for financial support, as defined by the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant was "wholly or substantially reliant" on the primary visa applicant for financial support to meet her basic needs, and whether this reliance was greater than any reliance on other sources.

The Tribunal reasoned that to be considered a member of the family unit under regulation 1.12(2), the applicant, being over 18, had to satisfy the definition of "dependent" under regulation 1.05A. This required demonstrating a substantial period of wholly or substantially reliance on the primary visa applicant for financial support for basic needs, and that this reliance was greater than any other source of support. The Tribunal found that the applicant's current employment as a pharmacist indicated she was not wholly or substantially reliant on the primary visa applicant for financial support. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.