Zhang (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Bifang Wei (the primary applicant) and Chi Zhang (the secondary applicant) against a delegate's decision to refuse a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820. The refusal was based on the delegate's dissatisfaction that the secondary applicant, Chi Zhang, was a member of the family unit of the primary applicant. The core of the dispute was whether Chi Zhang qualified as a "dependent child" of Ms Bifang Wei at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Chi Zhang was a "dependent child" of Ms Bifang Wei, as defined by regulation 1.12 of the Migration Regulations 1994, and consequently, whether he was a "member of the family unit" for the purposes of the visa application. The Tribunal was required to interpret the meaning of "dependent" as defined in regulation 1.05A, considering whether Chi Zhang was wholly or substantially reliant on Ms Bifang Wei for financial support to meet his basic needs, and whether this reliance was greater than any reliance on other persons or sources.

The Tribunal considered the evidence presented, including departmental and tribunal files, and oral evidence given at the hearing. It noted that Chi Zhang had arrived in Australia on a student visa and was included as a secondary applicant on Ms Bifang Wei's partner visa application. The Tribunal concluded that, based on the evidence, Chi Zhang was entirely financially dependent on Ms Bifang Wei for his basic needs. The Tribunal also acknowledged that there may have been genuine misunderstandings or mistakes in the application form.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant meets the relevant criteria for a Subclass 820 (Partner (Temporary)) visa, specifically clauses 820.311(a)(i) and 820.321(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.