Huan (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by Huan for an Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa, specifically a Subclass 835 (Remaining Relative) visa. The applicant sought to join their Australian relative, but the sponsor's father, who was also a relative of the applicant, had lost contact with both the applicant and the sponsor, and his whereabouts were unknown.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the Subclass 835 visa, particularly concerning the requirement that the applicant be the "remaining relative" of an Australian relative. This involved assessing whether the sponsor's father, who was also a relative, could be considered absent or deceased for the purposes of the visa, and whether the applicant was genuinely the "remaining relative" in circumstances where contact had ceased and whereabouts were unknown.

The Tribunal reasoned that a presumption of death could not be applied in the absence of sufficient evidence. The evidence suggested that the sponsor's father may have deliberately chosen not to maintain contact. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for being the "remaining relative" under the Subclass 835 visa. The Tribunal also noted that no material supported the applicant meeting the prescribed criteria for any other visa subclasses considered.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Subclass 835 visa.