2110439 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, brought by an applicant claiming to be the spouse of an Australian citizen. The dispute centred on whether the parties were in a genuine and continuing married relationship as required by the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by Margie Bourke, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a spouse relationship under section 5F of the Migration Act 1958 and regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing the financial aspects, nature of the household, social aspects, and the nature of the commitment between the parties, considering all circumstances of their relationship. The Tribunal also had to consider evidence relating to a nondisclosure certificate that had been issued and subsequently revoked, and the attendance of invited witnesses.

The Tribunal reasoned that to establish a married relationship, there must be a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others, the relationship must be genuine and continuing, and the couple must live together or not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. In assessing these elements, the Tribunal considered evidence from various witnesses, including the principal of a school attended by the parties' children, who provided evidence of the applicant's caring role and expressed no doubt about the genuineness of the spousal relationship.

Ultimately, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 820 Partner visa under clauses 820.211(2) and 820.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.