Farah (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa, specifically a Subclass 835 (Remaining Relative) visa. The applicant sought to be sponsored by their brother, Mr Ahmed Mohamed Farah. The dispute centred on whether the sponsor met the definition of an "Australian relative" as required by the regulations, which necessitates being an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident, or an eligible New Zealand citizen. The decision was made by Margie Bourke, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the sponsorship requirements for the Subclass 835 visa were met. This involved determining if the sponsor, Mr Farah, qualified as an "Australian relative" under the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to ascertain if Mr Farah was an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident, or an eligible New Zealand citizen, as defined in regulation 1.03. The Tribunal also considered the requirement that the sponsor be "settled" in Australia.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the evidence presented regarding the sponsor's immigration status. The sponsor declared he was born in Mogadishu and was a citizen of New Zealand, providing a New Zealand passport. The applicant and their representative confirmed that the sponsor and other family members held Subclass TY 444 visas and were not Australian citizens or permanent residents. The Tribunal found no evidence to suggest the sponsor was an Australian citizen or permanent resident. While the sponsor was a relative and resided in Australia, he did not meet the definition of an "eligible New Zealand citizen" as defined in the regulations, nor was he an Australian citizen or permanent resident.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the prescribed criteria for the Subclass 835 visa. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.