Eshete (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal before the Federal Circuit Court regarding a visa application. The applicant, a young person, sought a Subclass 445 (Dependent Child) visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant qualified as a "dependent child" and a "child of a parent" under the relevant migration regulations, particularly in circumstances where the biological father had allegedly abandoned the applicant and the applicant's mother was the primary financial supporter.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant met the criteria for a "dependent child" under clause 445.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, and whether the applicant qualified as a "child of a parent" for the purposes of clause 445.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. These determinations were crucial for the applicant's eligibility for the visa.

The Tribunal found that the applicant, by virtue of their age at the time of application, was dependent on the visa-holding parent, Ms. Asmamaw. The Tribunal further considered the definition of "child of a person" as provided by section 5CA of the Migration Act 1958, which refers to the meaning of "child" in the Family Law Act 1975. While acknowledging that the Family Law Act does not precisely define "child," the Tribunal noted that a child-parent relationship generally refers to the biological parents, but also allows for other relationships under section 60H of the Family Law Act. Given the evidence presented, including the mother's financial support and the father's abandonment, the Tribunal accepted the applicant's claims and found that the applicant met the requirements of both clauses.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant met the criteria under clauses 445.211 and 445.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.