1721845 (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820, against the decision to affirm the refusal of his application. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant and his sponsor were in a genuine de facto relationship as defined by section 5CB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The applicant also claimed to have suffered family violence perpetrated by the sponsor.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant and the sponsor had ever been de facto partners, considering the definition and criteria set out in section 5CB of the Act and regulation 1.09A of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing various aspects of their relationship, including financial and household matters, social presentation, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as well as considering the impact of alleged family violence.

The Tribunal found that while the parties may have provided each other with some companionship and emotional support for a period, the evidence did not establish a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others, nor did it indicate that they viewed their relationship as long-term. This conclusion was influenced by evidence of the sponsor's extra-relationship affairs and a lack of evidence from her regarding her commitment. The Tribunal also noted that despite the applicant's claims about issues with his migration agent, he had ample time to provide supporting documentation for his partner visa application. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa, finding that the applicant did not meet the requirements of clauses 820.211 and 820.221 of the Migration Regulations.