Nkrumah (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Child (Residence) (Class AH) visa, subclass 101. The review applicant sought to have the Department's decision set aside. The Tribunal, constituted by Russell Matheson, considered the evidence before it, including the Department's file and the applicant's own file.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the visa applicant, having turned 18, had, within the prescribed timeframe after completing secondary education, undertaken a full-time course of study leading to a professional, trade, or vocational qualification. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the applicant met the criteria relating to relationships and full-time work as stipulated for applicants over 18.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was born in September 1996 and had turned 18 by the time the application was made. It was satisfied, based on the sponsor's evidence, that the applicant was not engaged to be married and had never had a spouse or de facto partner, thus meeting the relationship criteria under cl.101.213(1)(a). Furthermore, the Tribunal accepted the sponsor's assertion that the applicant was not currently working and found no evidence of the applicant ever being engaged in full-time work, satisfying cl.101.213(1)(b).

Given these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the criteria under cl.101.213 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for a Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with the direction that the applicant met these specific criteria.