Langlois (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered whether Stephanie was a member of the family unit of Mrs Langlois for the purposes of a Skilled Independent (Permanent) (Class SI) visa, subclass 189. The primary applicant, Mrs Langlois, sought to include Stephanie as a dependent child in her visa application.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if Stephanie met the definition of a "member of the family unit" as defined by the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically regulation 1.12. This required assessing whether Stephanie, as an adult child, was dependent on Mrs Langlois or incapacitated for work, as stipulated by the regulations.

The Tribunal reasoned that regulation 1.12(2)(b) outlines the criteria for a child to be considered a member of the family unit. For children aged 18 and over, dependency on the family head is a key requirement. Regulation 1.05A further defines "dependent" as being "wholly or substantially reliant" on the other person for financial support to meet basic needs, and that this reliance must be greater than reliance on any other source. The Tribunal noted that Stephanie, born in 1995, was nearly 27 years old at the time of the decision, had completed her studies, and was in full employment. Her own evidence confirmed she was not incapacitated for work.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Stephanie was not dependent on Mrs Langlois and therefore did not meet the criteria under regulation 1.12(2)(b)(ii) or (iii). The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Skilled Independent (Permanent) visa, as the requirement for Stephanie to be a member of the family unit was not satisfied.