Sharifi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a Partner (Provisional) visa (subclass 309) by a secondary visa applicant, who was the young adult brother of the primary visa applicant. The dispute centred on whether the secondary applicant qualified as a member of the family unit for the purposes of the visa application, specifically whether he was wholly or substantially dependent on the primary applicant for a substantial period. The secondary applicant was an undocumented refugee in a third country.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the secondary applicant met the definition of a member of the family unit as defined by the Migration Regulations. This involved assessing whether he was dependent on the primary visa applicant, his sister, and whether this dependency met the required threshold of being "wholly or substantially dependent for a substantial period." The Tribunal also had to consider the evidence provided to support this claim of dependency.

The Tribunal found that the evidence presented lacked the necessary specificity to establish the required dependency. Crucially, the dependency that was evidenced was on the review applicant's brother-in-law, not on the primary visa applicant (his sister). The Tribunal noted that the regulations distinguish between a family head and a spouse, and in this instance, the dependency was not established in relation to the primary visa applicant. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.