Kaur (Migration)

This decision concerned an application for an Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa, specifically a Subclass 835 (Remaining Relative) visa. The applicant sought to establish that they were a "remaining relative" of their sister, Ms Parminder Kaur, who was an Australian permanent resident at the time of the application. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for this visa subclass.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant qualified as a "remaining relative" under regulation 1.15 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the Australian relative (Ms Kaur) was a sibling of the applicant, whether Ms Kaur was usually resident in Australia, and crucially, whether the applicant and their spouse or de facto partner had any "near relatives" other than those who were usually resident in Australia and held Australian citizenship, permanent residency, or were eligible New Zealand citizens.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. It found that while the Australian relative was indeed the applicant's sister and was usually resident in Australia, the applicant failed to demonstrate that they had no "near relatives" offshore. The definition of "near relative" in regulation 1.15(2) includes parents, siblings, and certain children. The applicant's sister, who was living in the United Kingdom at the time of the application, was considered a "near relative" who was not usually resident in Australia, thereby preventing the applicant from meeting the criteria for a remaining relative visa.