Auckland (The NZ Today)
An Indian migrant who spent almost seven years living and working in New Zealand has lost his appeal to regain permanent resident status after the Immigration and Protection Tribunal found he failed to meet the requirements because he remained outside New Zealand after his resident visa travel conditions expired.
The 32-year-old Indian citizen had applied for a Permanent Resident Visa (PRV) under the After Resident Visa category, including his wife and their young son, but Immigration New Zealand declined the application.
The Tribunal confirmed that Immigration New Zealand’s decision was correct and found that his personal circumstances did not amount to “special circumstances” that would justify an exception by the Immigration Minister.
The man first arrived in New Zealand in July 2016 on a student visa.
Over the following years, he completed studies, obtained post-study work and essential skills work visas, and worked in New Zealand.
He met his wife in New Zealand after she arrived as a student in 2019, and the couple married in October 2020.
In April 2022, they were granted resident visas under the Special (2021 Resident) category.
However, in March 2023, the couple left New Zealand and travelled to Canada.
According to the man, the trip was initially intended to visit his brother and his wife, but serious family circumstances meant they stayed longer than planned.
He told the Tribunal that his brother’s wife had suffered a miscarriage and the couple remained in Canada to provide emotional and financial support.
Later, he helped his brother financially by contributing money towards a house, and after his brother’s financial difficulties increased, he obtained a Canadian work visa and started working as a welder.
Their son was born in Canada in 2024 and is a Canadian citizen.
The man said he always intended to return to New Zealand, where he had built his life for several years.
However, when he applied for permanent residence in July 2025, Immigration New Zealand found he no longer met the requirements.
Under residence instructions, applicants for a Permanent Resident Visa must either hold a resident visa and have held it continuously for at least 24 months, or have held a resident visa within the 90 days before applying and have met the required conditions before it expired.
Because the man was outside New Zealand when his travel conditions expired, his resident visa expired in April 2024.
The Tribunal found that when he applied for permanent residence in July 2025, he no longer held a resident visa and had not held one within the required period.
The Tribunal acknowledged that Immigration New Zealand had made an error in recording the date of his visa expiry, but found that the mistake did not change the outcome.
It said his resident visa expired because he was outside New Zealand without valid travel conditions after April 2024.
The migrant argued that his family circumstances should be considered exceptional.
He said he had spent almost seven years in New Zealand, had worked, contributed to the country and only remained overseas because of his responsibilities towards his brother’s family.
The Tribunal accepted that his reasons were genuine and recognised that losing his resident status had significant consequences.
However, it said failing to understand immigration conditions and losing a visa after remaining overseas was not uncommon enough to be considered an extraordinary situation.
“The fact that a person has chosen to leave New Zealand to support their family and not exercised due diligence on their immigration status,” the Tribunal said, did not make the circumstances unusual or out of the ordinary.
The Tribunal also considered the impact on the couple’s young son, who is a Canadian citizen.
It found the child’s interests were important but said he had always lived with both parents and would not be separated from them regardless of where the family eventually settled.
The Tribunal noted that the child could access healthcare and education in Canada and that his best interests did not require his parents to be granted New Zealand residence.
However, the decision noted that the man may still have options to return to New Zealand through a work visa.
The Tribunal said his welding background could potentially provide a pathway under future skilled residence options, as welding was listed among eligible trades and technician occupations.
It noted he had a Level 4 welding qualification and several years of welding experience in New Zealand.
Despite acknowledging his long connection with New Zealand, the Tribunal concluded that his circumstances did not meet the threshold for an exception.
It found that while he and his wife had spent significant time in New Zealand and contributed through employment, they had not established “special circumstances” requiring intervention by the Minister of Immigration.
The appeal was dismissed, and Immigration New Zealand’s decision to decline his permanent residence application was confirmed.
