Almendras (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 309. The dispute concerned whether the visa applicant was sponsored by the review applicant, Erwin Cabales Almendras, and whether the sponsorship requirements under the Migration Regulations 1994 were met. The Department had requested further information regarding sponsorship on multiple occasions, which was not provided, leading to a delegate's decision that the applicant had not demonstrated sponsorship and therefore did not meet criterion cl 309.213(1)(a).

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the sponsorship requirements for a Subclass 309 visa were satisfied. This involved assessing whether the review applicant, as the nominated sponsor, met the age and citizenship requirements, and whether the sponsorship was approved and in force at the time of the decision. The Tribunal also considered additional sponsorship limitations introduced by amendments to the Regulations, including those relating to disclosure of convictions, lifetime sponsorship limits, and waiting periods between sponsorships, as well as provisions concerning sponsors charged with or convicted of certain offences.

The Tribunal reasoned that while a formal sponsorship form (47sp) had not been lodged, the evidence provided, including a marriage certificate valid under Australian law, indicated that the review applicant was the spouse of the visa applicant and undertook the obligations of a sponsor as defined in reg 1.20. The Tribunal inferred that the review applicant met the age requirement and was over 18. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the visa applicant met criteria cl 309.211(1)(a) and cl 309.222(1) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

The Tribunal remitted the application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the visa applicant met the specified criteria relating to sponsorship.