The Full Court held that paragraph 8.3(2) of Direction No 99 required decision-makers to give 'more weight' to a non-citizen's ties to his or her child and/or children (not to all immediate family members), and that 'child' in that paragraph means a minor child under 18 years of age, construed in context alongside other references to children in the Direction. The Court further held that 'more weight' under paragraph 8.3(2) does not require the greatest weight to be given to ties with a child — the ultimate weight depends on the facts, including the strength of the tie. As the appellant's son was 18 at the time of the Tribunal's decision, paragraph 8.3(2) was not enlivened, and the Tribunal did not err by considering the son's interests under paragraph 8.3(1) without applying the 'more weight' direction. The construction is now of limited ongoing significance as Direction 110 has removed the equivalent provision.
The full text is available to signed-in members.