Gebreslassie (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visas by two visa applicants, who were claimed to be the sons of the primary applicant's sister. The primary applicant, Mrs Sellamawit Tesfay Gebresadik, had applied for a 309/100 Partner visa sponsored by Mr Tewolde Tsega Birhan Gebreslassie, an Australian citizen. The delegate refused the visa application, and this decision was subsequently reviewed by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the visa applicants met the definition of 'dependent' as outlined in regulation 1.05A(a) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This definition requires that an applicant be wholly or substantially reliant on the primary applicant for financial support to meet basic needs for a substantial period immediately before the application, and that this reliance be greater than reliance on any other person or source. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to consider whether the visa applicants were members of the family unit of the primary applicant at the time of application (clause 309.311) and at the time of decision (clause 309.321).

The Tribunal considered evidence that the primary applicant had taken full responsibility for the visa applicants from the end of 2011 until her departure for Australia in 2016, and that she and the review applicant continued to support them. However, the review applicant's evidence regarding the regularity and exact amounts of financial support was imprecise. The primary applicant was unable to provide an exact figure for the support provided over the past five years. The Tribunal concluded that the visa applicants did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa, specifically regarding their dependence on the primary applicant and their status as members of her family unit.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicants Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visas.