Ahmed (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Provisional) visa (Subclass 309) by a woman residing in Bangladesh, sponsored by her husband, an Australian citizen. The core dispute revolved around whether the parties were in a genuine and continuing spousal relationship, as required by the Migration Regulations 1994. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was tasked with reviewing a delegate's decision to refuse the visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and the sponsor were validly married and, if so, whether they demonstrated a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, that their relationship was genuine and continuing, and that they lived together or did not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. In making this assessment, the Tribunal had to consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including the financial and social aspects, the nature of their household, and their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal noted that the parties had provided consistent evidence regarding their meeting, cohabitation in Australia, India, and Bangladesh, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their living arrangements. While acknowledging concerns raised by the delegate regarding the pooling of finances, the presentation of the relationship to others, and the sponsor's declining health, the Tribunal found that the parties were validly married. The Tribunal considered the evidence of the financial and social aspects of the relationship, the nature of their household, and their commitment to each other. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration, directing that the visa applicant met certain criteria for the Subclass 309 visa.