Anderson (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant a Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa, subclass 300. The review applicant, an 80-year-old Australian citizen, was the sponsor for the visa applicant, a 62-year-old woman from Vietnam. The couple claimed to have met in April 2017 and become engaged in November 2017, with an initial intended marriage date of 12 January 2020.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the requirements of cl 300.215 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations were met. This clause mandates that the Tribunal must be satisfied that both the applicant and the sponsor genuinely intended to marry each other within the prescribed visa period. The Tribunal was required to assess this intention at both the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision.

The Tribunal considered various documents, including Notices of Intended Marriage with differing dates, a receipt for lodging a Notice of Intended Marriage, a Single Status Certificate, and a statement from the visa applicant regarding a change of wedding date. However, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the couple genuinely intended to marry during the visa period. This was due to the inability to verify annotations regarding intended marriage dates, the absence of evidence of payment for the solemnisation of the marriage ceremony, and a lack of other evidence demonstrating arrangements for the marriage. Furthermore, no updated information had been submitted to support the parties' intention to marry. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the criteria for the grant of the visa were not met.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa.