Hean (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Tribunal regarding the refusal of Contributory Parent (Temporary) (Class UT) visas. The primary issue was whether the first-named visa applicant was the parent of the review applicant at the time the visa application was made. The review applicant had been customarily adopted in Cambodia in 1982-1983 by her adoptive parents, with whom she subsequently immigrated to New Zealand.

The Tribunal was required to determine the legal status of the customary adoption and its effect on the review applicant's parental relationships. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the customary adoption severed the legal relationship with her biological parents and whether this legal position remained unchanged even after the review applicant re-established contact with her biological parents. The Tribunal also had to assess whether the adoption arrangement was still in place at the time of the visa application.

The Tribunal reasoned that customary adoption in Cambodia, in the circumstances presented, was to be treated as having the same effect as a formal adoption, severing the legal relationship with biological parents and establishing a new legal parent-child relationship with the adoptive parents. Evidence, including the review applicant's marriage certificate and statements from her adoptive father, indicated that the adoption arrangement remained legally effective at the time of the visa application, and that her adoptive parents were considered her legal parents. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the first-named visa applicant was not the parent of the review applicant in the legal sense required for the visa application.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicants Contributory Parent (Class UT) visas, as the primary criteria were not met. The application of the second-named visa applicant, being dependent on the first, was also affirmed.