Bui (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (subclass 820) by an applicant who did not hold a substantive visa at the time of application. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether there were compelling reasons to waive the Schedule 3 criteria, as mandated by the Migration Regulations 1994.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had demonstrated compelling reasons to waive the Schedule 3 criteria, and whether the applicant had complied substantially with visa conditions. The applicant contended that a long-standing, genuine relationship of over five years, coupled with her significant care for the sponsor's health and financial well-being, constituted compelling reasons. The sponsor suffered from various health conditions, including blurred vision and a tendency to fall, requiring constant assistance with daily living, medication, and appointments. The applicant also highlighted the emotional support she provided and her role in maintaining family harmony.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding her extensive care for the sponsor, including assisting with his medical needs, managing household expenditure, and providing emotional support. It also noted the sponsor's reliance on unemployment benefits due to his ill health. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant's claims of a genuine relationship, while important for the primary visa criteria, did not, in themselves, constitute compelling reasons to waive Schedule 3. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant's inability to work was due to a condition on her bridging visa, and that the sponsor's income was primarily from unemployment benefits.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the primary criteria for the visa, and consequently, the secondary applicant was unable to satisfy clause 820.321. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not established compelling reasons to waive the Schedule 3 criteria, and therefore, the visa could not be granted.