HAXHNIKAJ (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Department of Immigration not to grant Visitor (Class FA) visas, subclass 600, to the applicants. The applicants sought to visit Australia to see their son and his wife. The review was heard by Melissa McAdam, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants' daughter-in-law, who was sponsoring their visit to Australia, qualified as a "relative" for the purposes of the Sponsored Family stream of the Visitor visa. This required the Tribunal to interpret the definitions of "relative" and "close relative" as provided in Regulation 1.03 of the Migration Regulations.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Sponsored Family stream of the Visitor visa, under clause 600.232 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, requires sponsorship by a settled Australian citizen or permanent resident who is a "relative" of the applicant. The definition of "relative" includes a "close relative" or specific other familial relationships. A "close relative" is defined to include a spouse, de facto partner, child, parent, brother, sister, step-child, step-brother, or step-sister. The Tribunal found that a daughter-in-law does not fall within the definition of a "close relative" or the broader definition of a "relative" under the Migration Regulations.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visas, as the applicants failed to satisfy the sponsorship criteria under clause 600.232.