Fofana (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa, Subclass 101, by a young woman from Liberia. The review applicant, an Australian citizen, claimed the visa applicant was her step-child. The delegate refused the application, finding insufficient evidence of a child-parent relationship and dependency. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the visa applicant met the criteria for a dependent child under the Migration Act and Regulations.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the visa applicant was a "dependent child" of the review applicant, and whether the requisite child-parent relationship existed. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider if the visa applicant was under 25 years of age, and if she was 18 or older, whether she was substantially reliant on the review applicant for financial support to meet her basic needs, and if this reliance was greater than any other source of support. The Tribunal also had to assess whether the review applicant had established that the visa applicant was her step-child.

The Tribunal considered the evidence, including a birth certificate naming the visa applicant's parents, a guardianship order, and monetary transfers from the review applicant to the visa applicant. While the review applicant claimed the visa applicant was the biological child of her deceased husband, the timing of the husband's death and the visa applicant's birth cast doubt on this. The Tribunal found that the evidence of financial support was limited to intermittent transfers between 2013 and 2017, and that the review applicant's evidence regarding prior support was evasive and inconclusive. Although the visa applicant was shown to be studying full-time, the Tribunal concluded that the evidence did not establish a substantial and greater reliance on the review applicant for financial support to meet basic needs, nor a clear child-parent relationship as required for the visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the visa applicant a Subclass 101 visa, finding that the criteria for the visa were not met.