Sethi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for review by Mr Sethi, who sought a Remaining Relative (Subclass 835) visa. The applicant claimed to be the remaining relative of his brother, Mr Neeraj Kumar Sethi, an Australian citizen. The core of the dispute concerned whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically the requirement that he and his spouse or de facto partner have no near relatives other than those usually resident in Australia and holding Australian citizenship or permanent residency.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied subregulation 1.15(1)(c) of the Migration Regulations 1994. This subregulation mandates that an applicant must demonstrate that they, and their spouse or de facto partner (if any), have no near relatives except for those who are usually resident in Australia and are Australian citizens, Australian permanent residents, or eligible New Zealand citizens. The applicant's brother, Mr Sandeep Sethi, residing in Canada, was identified as a near relative who did not meet these criteria.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa. It found that while the applicant's brother in Australia was an Australian relative, the applicant also had a brother, Mr Sandeep Sethi, residing in Canada. The Tribunal noted that Mr Sandeep Sethi was considered a near relative and his usual residence was not in Australia, nor was he an Australian citizen or permanent resident. Consequently, the applicant failed to satisfy the requirement under subregulation 1.15(1)(c). The Tribunal considered the applicant's health issues and the sponsor's offer of financial support, but these factors did not constitute grounds for a waiver or override the failure to meet the primary eligibility criterion.