Graovac v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

The applicants in Graovac v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs were citizens of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia who sought Supported Dependent Visas based on a nomination by their brother, Petar Graovac, an Australian permanent resident. Their applications were initially refused by a delegate of the respondent and, after a legal challenge, were again refused upon reconsideration. The applicants subsequently sought orders of review from the Court, alleging errors of law in the decisions. The applicants were displaced from their home due to the civil war in their country and were living in a refugee camp funded by humanitarian organisations. They relied on financial support from Petar, who was using his Australian income to supplement the basic needs provided by the camp. The legal issues in the case centred on the interpretation of the term “dependent” as used in criterion 430.222 of the Migration Regulations and whether the applicants met the definition of dependency in regulation 1.03.

The Court found that the delegate’s interpretation of “dependent” in criterion 430.222 was flawed. The Court noted that the term “dependent” in the criterion is a noun, whereas the definition in regulation 1.03 is an adjective, and that these terms differ both in spelling and as a figure of speech. The Court held that the correct approach to interpreting the undefined term “dependant” in the criterion was to adopt its ordinary dictionary meaning, which is broader than the definition provided in regulation 1.03. The Court concluded that applying the ordinary meaning of “dependant” would have established a more liberal test than that applied by the delegate.

The Court set aside the decisions of the respondent and referred the matter back to the respondent for redetermination by another delegate according to law. The Court ordered that the applicants be given a reasonable opportunity to provide any further information relevant to their applications and that the respondent pay the applicants’ costs. Liberty was granted to either party to apply within four days as to the forms of relief granted.