Le (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa, Subclass 836 (Carer), made by an applicant who claimed to be the carer of her mother, Mrs Hai Thi Vo. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the assistance Mrs Vo required could reasonably be provided by other relatives or Australian health and welfare services, and whether the applicant was willing and able to provide the necessary substantial and continuing assistance.

The Tribunal considered the definition of an "Australian relative" under the Migration Regulations 1994, finding that Mrs Vo, as an Australian citizen, met this criterion. It also accepted that the applicant was a "relative" of Mrs Vo, satisfying the requirements of regulation 1.15AA(1)(a). The central issues revolved around the interpretation and application of regulation 1.15AA(1)(e) and (f), which address the availability of alternative assistance and the applicant's capacity to provide care.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had claimed to be the carer of her mother, an Australian citizen, and that the evidence established Mrs Vo required ongoing assistance due to a medical condition. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant met the criteria under regulation 1.15AA(1)(e) and (f) by demonstrating that the required assistance could not reasonably be provided by other relatives or obtained from Australian services, and that the applicant was willing and able to provide the necessary care.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under clause 836.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.