BUAKLEE (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant against the decision of the Department of Home Affairs to refuse her Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa. The applicant claimed to be in a de facto relationship with an Australian citizen sponsor. The central dispute before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and the sponsor were, in fact, in a genuine and continuing de facto relationship as required by the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa, specifically whether she was the de facto partner of the sponsoring Australian citizen at the time of the decision. This involved assessing the overall circumstances of the relationship, including its financial, household, social, and commitment aspects, as outlined in regulation 1.09A of the Migration Regulations. Key issues included the credibility of the claimed relationship given evidence of joint overseas travel with the sponsor's ex-wife, unclear evidence regarding shared living expenses, and the parties' living arrangements.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal considered all the evidence presented, including documentary, photographic, and oral evidence. It noted that while the parties had registered their relationship and claimed to have lived together since October 2013, several factors raised doubts about the genuineness and continuing nature of their de facto relationship. Specifically, the Tribunal found that the parties had travelled overseas with the sponsor's ex-wife on multiple occasions, contrary to the applicant's assertions that they did not socialise with her. Furthermore, the sponsor had provided his ex-wife's sister as an emergency contact upon returning to Australia, and social media and other evidence indicated continued socialisation with the ex-wife and her sister. The Tribunal also noted a lack of clarity regarding shared living expenses and the parties' living arrangements, including lengthy shared accommodation with other individuals.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the grant of the visa. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa.