1902542 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, subclass 309. The visa applicant claimed to be the spouse of the review applicant, who was an Australian citizen. The dispute centred on whether the parties met the criteria for a genuine and continuing spousal relationship as defined by the Act and Regulations. The decision was made by Margie Bourke, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the parties were in a spouse relationship for the purposes of the Act, specifically whether they were validly married and whether the other requirements for a spouse relationship, as outlined in section 5F(2) of the Act and regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, were met. The Tribunal was required to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, social, household, and commitment aspects, despite the parties residing in separate countries.

The Tribunal found that the parties were validly married in India in June 2017, and this marriage was registered. The Tribunal was satisfied that the review applicant's previous marriages had been validly dissolved prior to this marriage. While acknowledging the parties resided in separate countries, the Tribunal was satisfied that the evidence presented demonstrated a long-term commitment to a spousal relationship. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the visa to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the visa applicant met the criteria under clauses 309.211 and 309.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.