Zivanovic (Migration)

Case

[2022] AATA 4827

24 October 2022


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Zivanovic (Migration) [2022] AATA 4827 [2022] AATA 4827 24 October 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate's decision to refuse a Subclass 116 (Carer) visa. The visa applicant, Goran, a Serbian citizen residing in Serbia, sought to migrate to Australia to care for his 77-year-old Australian citizen mother. The delegate had refused the visa on the basis that the criteria in clause 116.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) were not met, specifically that the required assistance could not reasonably be provided by another relative or obtained from Australian welfare, hospital, nursing, or community services.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the visa applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 116 visa, particularly concerning the need for 24-hour high dependency assistance for the review applicant, the willingness and ability of the visa applicant to provide such assistance, and whether the assistance could reasonably be obtained from other sources in Australia. The Tribunal also considered whether the review applicant had ongoing medical health issues requiring direct assistance for at least two years.

The Tribunal found that the review applicant did require, and would continue to require for at least two years, direct assistance with the practical aspects of daily life due to medical conditions. Crucially, the Tribunal was satisfied, based on new evidence provided, that the visa applicant was willing and able to provide the necessary care. Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the assistance could not reasonably be provided by another relative who was an Australian citizen or permanent resident, nor could it be obtained from welfare, hospital, nursing, or community services in Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Subclass 116 visa to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the criteria under clauses 116.211 and 116.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations were met.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Natural Justice

  • Statutory Construction

  • Remedies

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

6

Statutory Material Cited

0

Sefesi v MIBP [2016] FCCA 975
Anveel v MIBP [2013] FCCA 2181
Yee Joy v MIBP [2015] FCCA 2537