Pham (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an appeal by the applicant, Ms. Pham, concerning a Subclass 836 (Carer) visa. The primary dispute revolved around whether Ms. Pham was a "member of the family unit" of the primary visa applicant, her mother, and specifically, whether she was financially dependent on her mother at the time of the visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Ms. Pham met the criteria for being a dependent child or a dependent relative under the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether she was wholly or substantially reliant on her mother for financial support to meet her basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter, and whether this reliance was greater than any reliance on other sources. The definition of "dependent child" and "dependent" under the regulations were central to this assessment.

The Tribunal found that the evidence provided by both Ms. Pham and her mother was inconsistent and unsubstantiated. There were discrepancies regarding how financial support was provided, who received it, and the actual costs involved in meeting Ms. Pham's basic needs. Furthermore, the applicant's own claims of financial support, detailed in a graph, lacked independent corroboration. The Tribunal noted that the primary visa applicant had not initially disclosed Ms. Pham as a dependent and that her evidence about financial contributions had varied over time. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Ms. Pham met the dependency criteria.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Ms. Pham the Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa.