Madonia (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for an Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa, Subclass 836 (Carer), by Mr. Madonia. The applicant sought to be recognised as a carer for his sponsor, Mrs. Cufone. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant and sponsor met the definition of "close relative" as required by the relevant migration regulations. The decision was made by Steven Griffiths, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant and sponsor satisfied the definition of a "close relative" for the purposes of a Subclass 836 visa. This involved assessing whether the familial relationship between the applicant and sponsor, specifically that of great-aunt and nephew, met the legislative definition of "relative" and "close relative" under Australian migration law, notwithstanding cultural terminology used by the applicant. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had claimed to be the carer of an Australian relative, as required by clause 836.212 of the Regulations.

The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's submission that, in his cultural context, the sponsor was referred to as his "aunt," despite being the sister of his grandmother. However, the Tribunal affirmed that the assessment must be based on Australian legislation as it stood at the time the visa application was lodged. The evidence presented, including a family tree, established that the sponsor was the applicant's great-aunt. The Tribunal concluded that this relationship did not fall within the definition of a "close relative" as prescribed by the Regulations.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Subclass 836 visa, finding that the applicant did not meet the prescribed criteria as he was not a close relative, as defined, of the sponsor.