1700626 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 309. The review applicant was an Australian citizen, and the visa applicant claimed to be their spouse. The central dispute revolved around whether the parties were in a married relationship that satisfied the requirements of the *Migration Act 1994* (Cth) at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision. The Tribunal was required to determine if the parties met the criteria for a spouse relationship as defined by section 5F of the Act.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the parties were validly married and, if so, whether they had a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, whether the relationship was genuine and continuing, and whether they lived together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis, as stipulated by section 5F(2) of the Act. In assessing these matters, the Tribunal was directed to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including the financial and social aspects, the nature of the household, and the commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

The Tribunal found that the parties were married in Afghanistan in April 2016, and a marriage certificate issued by the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Supreme Court was presented, which the Tribunal found did not cast doubt on the validity of the marriage for the purposes of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the parties were married to each other under a marriage valid for the purposes of the Act, thus meeting the requirement of section 5F(2)(a). Given these findings, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, directing that the visa applicant met the criteria under cl.309.211 and cl.309.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.