Robosa (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an appeal by the review applicant concerning the refusal of an Other Family (Migrant) (Class BO) visa, specifically a Subclass 116 (Carer) visa. The dispute centred on whether the review applicant met the criteria for providing care to an Australian resident, as required for the visa subclass.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the review applicant could be considered a "carer" under regulation 1.15AA of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the assistance the review applicant proposed to provide could not reasonably be obtained from other relatives who were Australian citizens, permanent residents, or eligible New Zealand citizens, or from welfare, hospital, nursing, or community services available in Australia.

The Tribunal acknowledged evidence indicating the review applicant suffered from various medical conditions, including angina, lumbar back pain, osteoarthritis, and hypertension, which had deteriorated since a 2013 assessment. While accepting the review applicant required significant care, the Tribunal found that the review applicant's daughter, Mrs Robosa De Vera, was working full-time, as was her husband. Their four children were either engaged in tertiary studies, travelling, or attending primary school, and therefore unable to provide the necessary substantial and ongoing care. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the assistance the review applicant needed could reasonably be obtained from other sources in Australia.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Other Family (Migrant) (Class BO) visas to the applicants.