Quijano (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by a visa applicant concerning the refusal of an Other Family (Migrant) (Class BO) visa, specifically a Subclass 116 (Carer) visa. The applicant sought to migrate to Australia to care for their niece, who is the daughter of the applicant's sister, an Australian permanent resident. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for a carer visa, particularly the requirement that assistance could not reasonably be provided by other relatives or service providers in Australia.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the visa applicant qualified as a 'carer' under regulation 1.15AA of the Migration Regulations 1994, and whether the care recipient's need for assistance could not reasonably be met by other relatives or through various service providers, as stipulated by regulation 1.15AA(1)(e)(ii). The Tribunal also had to consider if the applicant was a 'relative' of the Australian resident and if the necessary certification regarding the care recipient's medical condition and ongoing need for care was met.

The Tribunal found that the visa applicant was a 'relative' of the Australian resident, satisfying regulation 1.15AA(1)(a), as the applicant was the uncle of the care recipient. The Tribunal also considered a Bupa Medical Visa Services Carer Visa Assessment Certificate and a speech language assessment report, which indicated the care recipient had autism spectrum disorder requiring ongoing support. However, the Tribunal ultimately affirmed the decision to refuse the visa. This was because the visa application itself indicated that the applicant had other relatives residing in the Philippines, including his wife's mother and brothers. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not a 'remaining relative' as required by clause 115.211 of the Migration Regulations, and therefore was unable to meet the eligibility criteria for the visa.