Katyara (Migration)

[2023] AATA 2907

Katyara  (Migration) [2023] AATA 2907 (28 August 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REVIEW APPLICANT:  Mr Aakash Katyara

VISA APPLICANTS:  Miss Anjlee Shankar Katyara
Mr Vivek Katyara

CASE NUMBER:  2213278

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2022/783400

MEMBER:Luke Hardy

DATE:28 August 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the two visa applicants meet the following criterion for Subclass 600 visas:

·cl 600.232(1) and (2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

The Tribunal makes no findings in relation to any other Subclass 600 visa criteria having limited itself to the issue under review.

Statement made on 28 August 2023 at 11:15am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Visitor (Class FA) visa – Subclass 600 (Visitor) – genuine temporary entrant – evidence of family relationship provided upon review – decision under review remitted 

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 360
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 600.232

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicants Visitor (Class FA) visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act). The applicants applied for the visas on 28 March 2022. The delegate refused to grant the visas on 7 September 2022.

2. The visa applicants are adult siblings residing in Pakistan. They have provided evidence of being children of the same father. The review applicant is their adult brother in Australia.

3. The delegate made the decision on the basis that insufficient evidence of the two visa applicants’ sponsor being their sibling was provided as required to satisfy cl 600.232(1) and (2), a criterion for the grant of the visa under the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations).

4. On 22 August 2023, the Tribunal received a screen capture image of the review applicant’s photograph. The Tribunal finds no reason, in this particular instance, to conclude that it is a forgery. The certificate provides details of the same person being the father of all three applicants in this review In light of the new evidence received, the Tribunal is satisfied that cl 600.232(1) and (2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations are met and has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

5. In reaching its decision the Tribunal did not consider a hearing to be necessary, as it was able to find in favour of the applicants on the basis of the material before it, pursuant to s 360(2)(a) of the Act.

   DECISION

6. The Tribunal remits the application for reconsideration, with the direction that the two visa applicants meet the following criterion for Subclass 600 visas:

   ·cl 600.232(1) and (2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations

   The Tribunal makes no findings in relation to any other Subclass 600 visa criteria having limited itself to the issue under review.

   Luke Hardy
   Member